John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS

Welcome Back Undo

Nice comeback with that video...

You get my Star

Well its been a while since Pegasus did a Press Release LOL

So after Undo's video seems like a good time as any. I have been working on collecting data and now over the next few weeks I will put that together and present it...

I will be going into 4 sections in detail... then we can discuss each segment at length.. and keep tossing out those anomalies at the same time

1) The Apollo Movie Set...
2) Where Do They Launch all these "Secret" Missions From
3) The Farside Base
4) The Aquila Cargo Transport

I am going to revamp the Menu at my site so its easier to find references. The old menu worked but there is too much stuff there that even I have trouble finding a reference quickly...

con't........

PEGASUS PRESS RELEASE JUNE 19TH 2007....

Moon Landing Images Real or Fake?

Now we have stated many times that we believe that the moon landing not only happened, but that we have already been there before Apollo. But tthat the IMAGES were faked for various reasons...

Now one thing that was missing was the location of the studio. I pointed out the "sliding crater" in "Live and Let Die" only to be reminded it was in "You Only Live Twice" (Hey no one is perfect ) and the Moon Studio in "Diamonds are Forever"...

Well I finally found some real locations....

Aldrin and Armstrong on the Moon collecting samples...





These images were taken in Building 9 at the Manned Spacecraft Center and it appears that there are several "Peekaboos" in the "Sky". (This may be a secondary explanation for the "Peekaboos" we spotted in other Apollo sky shots for those who don't want to accept them as "Spaceships")

Lets turn on the lights to see where they are...



Now THAT"S what I call a "Trick of Light and Shadow"

Here is one shot (of many)somewhere in the Arizona or Nevada Desert...



Its no wonder in the video clip Armstrong(?) says...
"Its like much of the high desert in the United States...."

Now here are three Color images from various Apollo missions... look at them and see if you can spot the anomaly...








I will provide all the original links at the end of the postings...

Con't.....

Originally posted by zorgon
Welcome Back Undo

Nice comeback with that video...

You get my Star

Thanks Zorg.
i missed a few (lol more like aLOT) of anomalies. I wasn't sure how big the film was going to be (file size) so I stopped too soon. It was actually fun to do and that was just with windows movie maker. i wonder what the fancy-schmancy ones can do.

Apollo Training Photos
Cinder Lake
Sunset Crater, northeast of Flagstaff, Arizona

The previous images showed the location of the Studio... but they needed an outdoor site as well... but there are very few regions on the Earth that look like the Moon...

Well no problem... just dig a few craters....



Hmmmm well that could take awhile... and you just are not going to get that all important EJECTA right with a shovel...

Okay so lets try a little dynamite!!

Yesseree thats the ticket !!



By Jove! Now THAT gives you EJECTA....

The end result? The Moon on Earth



Another location for "exercises" was Meteor Crater...



And while we are talking about James Bond movies... remember that cool rocket pack he wore in Thunderball?...

Starting in 1963, the Astrogeology Research Program played an important role in training astronauts destined to explore the lunar surface and in supporting the testing of equipment for both manned and unmanned missions.

As part of the astronauts' training, USGS and NASA geoscientists gave lectures and field trips during the 1960's and early 1970's to teach astronauts the basics of terrestrial and lunar geology. Field trips included excursions into the Grand Canyon to demonstrate the development of geologic structure over time; Lowell Observatory (Flagstaff) and Kitt Peak National Observatory (Tucson); Meteor Crater east of Flagstaff ; and Sunset Crater cinder cone and nearby lava flows in the Flagstaff area. This training was essential to giving astronauts the skills and understanding to make observations about what they would see on the lunar surface and to collect samples for later study back on Earth.

The volcanic fields around Flagstaff have proven particularly useful in testing equipment and training astronauts. Cameras planned for use in the Surveyor project were tested on the Bonito Flow in Sunset Crater National Park because the lava flow appeared to be similar to flows on the lunar surface. A field of artificial impact craters were created in the Cinder Lakes volcanic field near Flagstaff to create a surface similar to the proposed first manned American landing site on the Moon.

SOURCE: USGS

That whole page looks more like a Hollywood Movie set page than a NASA history page...



Con't.....

MEANWHILE BACK AT BUILDING 9

So now back to that indoor movie set... It seems its still there and being reused....



Now remember those three Apollo images I just posted? Did you guess what the anomaly is in each image?

Well I will tell you... THEY ARE NOT TAKEN ON THE MOON



Those three images are from Tom Hanks new IMAX 3D film "Magnificent Desolation"

SOURCE: Space.com

This is how you solve the gravity problem...



Now here is how you add the distant mountains...



Now compare THESE added mountains with those in the other Apollo images...



Here is the collected data with all relevant links... I look forward to others digging up more that I missed

Apollo Training Locations

Now in closing I will add one little clip that I really liked... We could use a little comic relief in here



The End

It would explain why some of the 'original' moon pictures have a pitch black sky like the 'fakes' posted above by Zorgon.

They went to the moon and walked there, i'm 100% sure about that. I'm not so sure if that was the case with Apollo 11.

Maybe NASA is using faked material without even knowing and uses original and fakes for different mission pictures/movies. It would allmost be impossible for outsiders to be sure from what mission a picture or movie is taken, and it would be very easy for them to use earlier material presented as later material.

It would be nice to get a comment on my 'analysis' from the Endymion crater. I atleast hoped for a comment of why i'm right or wrong. We should not forget that pictures here, that show proof of life or past life on the moon should have been tested to the fullest to rule out any other solution of why something looks like it does. I showed the town and tower/dish on the LPOD like it is on Mike's picture, but it is not a town/tower /dish.

Originally posted by Cygnific

It would be nice to get a comment on my 'analysis' from the Endymion crater.

Cygnific, with all due respect your 'analysis' is not very well presented. You are going to have to be a little more specific if you want comments.

I atleast hoped for a comment of why i'm right or wrong.

Right or wrong about what? What is it you are trying to tell us?

We should not forget that pictures here, that show proof of life or past life on the moon should have been tested to the fullest to rule out any other solution of why something looks like it does.

I agree.

I showed the town and tower/dish on the LPOD like it is on Mike's picture,

I must have missed that. Where exactly did you show it? You mean you posted the LPOD picture? Is that what you mean by "I showed...".

but it is not a town/tower /dish.

OK. What is it?

Cygnific, please accept my apologies for being a little dense this morning. I think it is my age creeping up on me with a sledgehammer. Or at least that is my excuse. C'mon, out with it! What do you see at Endymion? Tricks of light and shadows?

I just finished reading “Two Sides of the Moon” by David Scott and Alexei Leonov (Copyright 2004 David Scott and Alexei Leonov). It was about their experiences in the space program. Scott went to the moon on Apollo 15 with Jim Irwin and Al Worden.

The following is a quote from the book as they were descending to landing on the moon:

Irwin: “Make a great ski area if they’d just put some snow on it.”

Scott: “Looks like there is some in parts.”

Jim: “Don’t think there’s any atmosphere. I’m going to write me a joke. ‘Astronauts come back from moon; say it’s great, but has no atmosphere’.”

So I am asking myself here, what exactly is the joke? Is the joke that “It’s great but has no atmosphere?” Or is the joke it has no atmosphere?

Just about to catch up on the thread... but wanted to post this first...

This was brought to my attention by Squiz in another thread... but in my opinion is very relevant to what John was talking about with Goldstone and Australia

Originally posted by squiz

The video reminded me of this story.

In western Australia during the live broadcast of the Apollo 11 moon landing, several people saw a very unusual occurrence. One viewer, Una Ronald watched the telecast and was astonished with what she saw.

The residents of Honeysuckle Creek, Australia, actually saw a different broadcast to the rest of the World. Just shortly before Armstrong stepped onto the Moons surface, a change could be seen where the picture goes from a stark black to a brighter picture. Honeysuckle Creek stayed with the picture and although the voice transmissions were broadcast from Goldstone, the actual film footage was broadcast from Australia. As Una watched Armstrong walking on the surface of the Moon she spotted a Coke bottle that was kicked in the right hand side of the picture. This was in the early hours of the morning and she phoned her friends to see if they had seen the same thing, unfortunately they had missed it but were going to watch the rebroadcast the next day. Needless to say, the footage had been edited and the offending Coke bottle had been cut out of the film. But several other viewers had seen the bottle and many articles appeared in The West Australian newspaper.

Western Australia received their coverage in a different way to the rest of the World. They were the only Country where there wasn't a delay to the 'live' transmission. Bill Kaysing says 'NASA and other connected agencies couldn't get to the Moon and back and so went to ARPA (Advanced Research Projects Agency) in Massachusetts and asked them how they could simulate the actual landing and space walks. We have to remember that all communications with Apollo were run and monitored by NASA, and therefore journalists who thought they were hearing men on the Moon could have easily been misled. All NASA footage was actually filmed off TV screens at Houston Mission Control for the TV coverage... No one in the media were given the raw footage.'

www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...

I need to follow up on this one

Originally posted by observe50in 2 years Japan was going
to be sending something up there and then they would know by the
pictures if what we left up there is there.

Did this ever happen, not that I know of. Japan is supposedly our
friend did we have to buy them so to say.

John and I have both shared the opinion that though they make
announcements, nothing will come of it... A while back I heard that
Japan was pulling out due to lack of funds... and at last report NASA
was in negotiations with China...

So now I find this...


Fox News

Japan May Cancel Moon Mission Due to Crippling Delays
TOKYO — Japan's space agency has recommended scrapping its first moon
mission after more than a decade of delays, a spokeswoman said Monday,
in the latest blow to the country's beleaguered space program.
www.foxnews.com...

Tokyo (AFP) Jan 15, 2007
Japan's space agency said Monday it had recommended cancelling a
much-delayed unmanned mission to the moon in the latest setback to the
nation's ambitions to explore the final frontier. The Japan Aerospace
Exploration Agency (JAXA) planned to call off its Lunar-A mission,
which was intended to shed light on the moon's origin and evolution
using a module to land on its surface, a spokesman said.

"The mother ship was built 10 years ago and over the years it has been
deteriorating, and it has come to a point where it can no longer be
used," project manager Takashi Nakajima told AFP.

"Instead of refurbishing the mission's mother ship or building a new
one, we made a recommendation that we would like to pursue other
possibilities. We do not want to build another similar space craft," he
added.

www.moondaily.com...
_Mission_999.html

And now China shows signs of "unrest" regarding their moon mission
plans. I wonder what NASA negotiations are discussing?

A Reuters article published Monday jumped to the headline, "China
Cancels Moon Plans to Focus on Space Station." Despite this and several
other false reports by English and American news organizations, China
Moon plans are the same as they were a month ago. The three-stage

Chang'e Project will see a lunar orbiter, Chang'e-1, launched in
December of 2006, a lander on the Moon by 2010 and a robotic sample
return mission by 2020. There have never been any solid plans for a
China human Moon mission, so such plans, much less all Moon plans,
cannot be "cancelled," as was reported by Reuters. At the International

Lunar Conference 2003, which took place on Hawai‘i Island six months
ago, China Chief Lunar Scientist Ouyang Ziyuan said by teleconference
from Beijing, "At present we don't have any plans to land a person on
the Moon." He, however, expressed his personal desire for the mission
and gave at least 15-20 years after the completion of the current
Chang'e Program as a probable timeframe for a taikonaut lunar landing.

www.spaceagepub.com...

As to those negotiations...

NASA Administrator Departs China After 'Rewarding' First Visit


NASA to limit cooperation with China's space prograrm

Seems we may be right after all... NASA won't let anyone else up there
to see whats going on.

Originally posted by yfxxx
=> Congratulations, Zorgon. You have just discovered a second sun in our solar system

!

Or a second light source Besides I said the LOOK LIKE a tower and dish... I haven't run up there yet to have a closer look..

My theory is slightly different than Zorgon's or John's.
I think NASA did send guys up to walk on the moon but when it came time to cross the "River Styx" (Van Allen Radiation Belts), they were met by a prearranged ET contingent in ET craft, who "Ferried" them across to the Moon. Images of the arrival of Apollo 11 to moonspace just above the Tranquility Base, landing site, show a large, unexplained anomalous flying thing next to it (in split HSL) that dwarfs it by comparison. There is one other possibility, as well:

The astronauts are hybrids, and they truly are a "special breed of men".

Reposting the video cause it's almost ready to break 100 views. hehe oops That's a long way from 10,200 but it's better than I thought it would get!





[edit on 19-6-2007 by undo]

This thread needs a song ...



Sing to the tune of "Wonderful World":

Don't know much of astronomy
Don't know much selenology
Don't know much about Newton's laws
But that cannot stop me of course

(*Chorus*)
'Cause I do know that science lies
And I can ignore the skeptics' cries
What a fantasy world I live in!

Don't know much about photography
But every pixel's an "anomaly"
And in my very own reality
Our moon has much more gravity

(*Chorus*)
Yes, I do know that NASA lies
And I can ignore the skeptics' cries
What a fantasy world I live in!

(*Chorus*)
Yes, I do know that NASA lies
...




Regards
yf

Originally posted by yfxxx
This thread needs a song ...

Sing to the tune of "Wonderful World":

Don't know much of astronomy
Don't know much selenology
Don't know much about Newton's laws
But that cannot stop me of course

(*Chorus*)
'Cause I do know that science lies
And I can ignore the skeptics' cries
What a fantasy world I live in!

Don't know much about photography
But every pixel's an "anomaly"
And in my very own reality
Our moon has much more gravity

(*Chorus*)
Yes, I do know that NASA lies
And I can ignore the skeptics' cries
What a fantasy world I live in!

(*Chorus*)
Yes, I do know that NASA lies
...

Regards
yf

I can see that going straight to the top of the ATS charts!
Do you need a manager?
Brilliant.

There is no single list called "The Scientific Method." It is a myth.

The rules of a science-fair typically require that students follow THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD, or in other words, hypothesis-experiment-conclusion. The students must propose a hypothesis and test it by experiment. This supposedly is the "Scientific Method" used by all scientists. Supposedly, if you don't follow the rigidly defined "Scientific Method" listed in K-6 textbooks, then you're not doing science. (Some science fairs even ban astronomy and paleontology projects. After all, where's the "experiment" in these?)

Unfortunately this is wrong, and there is no single "Scientific Method" as such. Scientists don't follow a rigid procedure-list called "The Scientific Method" in their daily work. The procedure-list is a myth spread by K-6 texts. It is an extremely widespread myth, and even some scientists have been taken in by it, but this doesn't make it any more real. "The Scientific Method" is part of school and school books, and is not how science in general is done. Real scientists use a large variety of methods (perhaps call them methods of science rather than "The Scientific Method.") Hypothesis / experiment / conclusion is one of these, and it's very important in experimental science such as physics and chemistry, but it's certainly not the only method. It would be a mistake to elevate it above all others. We shouldn't force children to memorize any such procedure list. And we shouldn't use it to exclude certain types of projects from science fairs! If "The Scientific Method" listed in a grade school textbook proves that Astronomy is not a science, then it's the textbook which is wrong, not Astronomy.

"Ask a scientist what he conceives the scientific method to be and he adopts an expression that is at once solemn and shifty-eyed: solemn, because he feels he ought to declare an opinion; shifty-eyed because he is wondering how to conceal the fact that he has no opinion to declare." - Sir Peter Medawar

There are many parts of science that cannot easily be forced into the mold of "hypothesis-experiment-conclusion." Astronomy is not an experimental science, and Paleontologists don't perform Paleontology experiments... so is it not proper Science if you study stars or classify extinct creatures?

Or, if a scientist has a good idea for designing a brand new kind of measurement instrument (e.g. Newton and the reflecting telescope) ...that certainly is "doing science." Humphrey Davy says "Nothing tends so much to the advancement of knowledge as the application of a new instrument." But where is The Hypothesis? Where is The Experiment? The Atomic Force Microscope (STM/AFM) revolutionized science. Yet if a student invented the very first reflector telescope or the very first AFM, wouldn't such a device be rejected from many school science fairs? After all, it's not an experiment, and the lists called "Scientific Method" say nothing about exploratory observation. Some science teachers would reject the STM as science; calling it 'mere engineering,' yet like the Newtonian reflector, the tunneling microscope is a revolution that opened up an entire new branch of science. Since it's instrument-inventing, not hypothesis-testing, should we exclude it as science? Were the creators of the STM not doing science when they came up with that device? In defining Science, the Nobel prize committee disagrees with the science teachers and science fair judges. The researchers who created the STM won the 1986 Nobel prize in physics. I'd say that if someone wins a Nobel prize in physics, it's a good bet that their work qualifies as "science."

Forcing kids to follow a caricature of scientific research distorts science, and it really isn't necessary in the first place.

Another example: great discoveries often come about when scientists notice anomalies. They see something inexplicable during older research, and that triggers some new research. Or sometimes they notice something weird out in Nature; something not covered by modern theory. Isaac Asimov said it well:

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' (I found it!) but 'That's funny...' "

This suggests that lots of important science comes NOT from proposing hypotheses or even from performing experiments, but instead comes from unguided observation and curiosity-driven exploration: from sniffing about while learning to see what nobody else can see. Scientific discovery comes from something resembling "informed messing around," or unguided play. Yet the "Scientific Method" listed in textbooks says nothing about this, their lists start out with "form a hypothesis." As a result, educators treat science as deadly serious business, and "messing around" is sometimes dealt with harshly.

www.amasci.com...

[edit on 6-20-2007 by Springer]

had to catch up on the last 12 pages...wow, looks like i missed the fight..

i'm always amazed that people can not accept the fact that govts are hidding ..something..from us. just look around at the world today and some of the info that has come out about past incidents that show how info was changed, fabricated or just an outright lie. ( no links..these are things that any well read individual should have read or stumbled over)

image tampering.......i think it is just a matter of who is doing the actual tampering....or who is order that the tampering be done.
Image tampering creating illusions

and

Viking tampering evidence

sorry, no pics or pasting 'cause i would have to paste a good portion of the pages....you will just have to click and look for yourself i know that will be tuff for most........it is a very interesting site.

i know what the cookie cutter response is...'just missing info lost being sent or received'. 'the govt could not possble have real time tampering software'.... IS IT? DO THEY?!?
what is soooo important on the moon or mars or venus ect that those in power have deemed to be hidden at ALL COSTS? if we use the 'historical truthfullness of govt' (yes it is my own concept...or wording) how can we believe anything that comes out of thier yaps?!?

Originally posted by johnlear

Jim: “Don’t think there’s any atmosphere. I’m going to write me a joke. ‘Astronauts come back from moon; say it’s great, but has no atmosphere’.”

So I am asking myself here, what exactly is the joke? Is the joke that “It’s great but has no atmosphere?” Or is the joke it has no atmosphere?

Funny joke, ofcourse it has atmosphere. Silly John

Hi guys, i would like your opinion on this image from the Lunar surface..