John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS

Surely this one is convincing too, how can this be debunked??

Speaking of the Russians

Found a little quote that I thought was really funny, yet so to the point...


"Ah yes. NASA ... National Association for the Specially Asinine.

During the 60's space race, NASA undertook a multi-million dollar progect which would culminate in the creation of a writing implement that could function effectively in a gravity free environment. After months of intense research and analysis, NASA emerged triumphant. They had created a pen that could write underwater, in a gravity free zone, in an acidic environment and in both low and high pressure atmospheres.

The Russians just used a pencil.

Smart those Russians

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Surely this one is convincing too, how can this be debunked??

NASA took the original photo and cleverly airbrushed in parts of a Walt Disney insignia in the lower right hand corner using craters as Mickey's ears. It was a master stroke of misinformation.

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Surely this one is convincing too, how can this be debunked??

NASA took the original photo and cleverly airbrushed in parts of a Walt Disney insignia in the lower right hand corner using craters as Mickey's ears. It was a master stroke of misinformation.

What about the " Base " John ?

John, what are your theories of this image..
I apologized if its already been gone over, i have read the thread, but cannot remember

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Hi guys, i would like your opinion on this image from the Lunar surface..

What can i say, a funny looking crater?

Originally posted by Fowl Play
John, what are your theories of this image..
I apologized if its already been gone over, i have read the thread, but cannot remember

It is the antenna of the Lunar Orbiter. Btw, the base picture, did you take it from the Clementine website?

Edited to remove linked picture.

[edit on 19/6/2007 by Cygnific]

No, i most certainly never..
But thanks for asking

Another beast...



[edit on 19-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

Originally posted by Fowl Play
No, i most certainly never..
But thanks for asking

So where did you get it from? I remember the 'base' picture only from a Clementine image.

Edit: The above picture is also the Antenna

[edit on 19/6/2007 by Cygnific]

Originally posted by Fowl Play
No, i most certainly never..
But thanks for asking

Another beast...

[edit on 19-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

that one is the arm of the ...well it's an arm of the spacecraft. i had the same reaction as you did but it's true. err, antenna? something like that. it's part of the spacecraft, anyway. the first one you posted though, and the second one, those are different.

[edit on 19-6-2007 by undo]

I stand corrected then, unusual... Just shows how unclear these images are at times

sorry to get off topic, but this reminds me of when the U.S. special forces spent millions trying to develop a tool or system that would help identify trip mine wires on the battlefield, the research was quite flawed and never really produced anything that worked efficiantly or reliably. God knows how much of tax payers money they spent on that one, guess what the S.A.S british special forces use still to this day that remains incredibly effective and cheap!.............silly string, and no that is not a joke. If it aint broke, dont fix it! again sorry to get off topic, love the thread been reading through the lot, keep up the good work.

Originally posted by zorgon
Speaking of the Russians

Found a little quote that I thought was really funny, yet so to the point...


"Ah yes. NASA ... National Association for the Specially Asinine.

During the 60's space race, NASA undertook a multi-million dollar progect which would culminate in the creation of a writing implement that could function effectively in a gravity free environment. After months of intense research and analysis, NASA emerged triumphant. They had created a pen that could write underwater, in a gravity free zone, in an acidic environment and in both low and high pressure atmospheres.

The Russians just used a pencil.

Smart those Russians

No, its an urban legend. It sounds good, but it really is just an anecdotal lesson that spawned into an urban legend. Its called "THE WRITE STUFF"

Here's another retelling of the legend (sound familiar?):

During the space race back in the 1960's, NASA was faced with a major problem. The astronaut needed a pen that would write in the vacuum of space. NASA went to work. At a cost of $1.5 million they developed the "Astronaut Pen". Some of you may remember. It enjoyed minor success on the commercial market.

The Russians were faced with the same dilemma.

They used a pencil.

ORIGINS OF THE URBAN LEGEND:
There is a charming anecdote that roams from e-mail box to e-mail box around the world about how, at the height of the space race, the Americans and Soviets approached the same problem: how an astronaut (or cosmonaut) could use a pen to write in zero gravity.

As the story goes, the Americans spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on an ambitious, gravity-immune ballpoint pen; they successfully developed such a pen; and this pen went on to become a massive commercial success in the private sector. The Soviets - with the simple elegance their scientists are so rightly famed for - opted instead to use a pencil.

Origins: The Penlesson of this anecdote is a valid one, that we sometimes expend a great deal of time, effort, and money to create a "high-tech" solution to a problem, when a perfectly good, cheap, and simple solution is right before our eyes. The anecdote offered above isn't a real example of this syndrome, however. Fisher did ultimately develop a pressurized pen for use by NASA astronauts (now known as the famous "Fisher Space Pen"), but both American and Soviet space missions initially used pencils, NASA did not seek out Fisher and ask them to develop a "space pen," Fisher did not charge NASA for the cost of developing the pen, and the Fisher pen was eventually used by both American and Soviet astronauts.

[edit on 6/19/2007 by greatlakes]

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Surely this one is convincing too, how can this be debunked??

Oh come on now... I don't mind skeptics but surely you are not going to try to pawn of that old Disney TV image are you? Look in the bottom right corner you will see the Disney TV logo

SKMDC1 posted this to remove the doubt...



This Thread...

[edit on 19-6-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Hi guys, i would like your opinion on this image from the Lunar surface..

I've always thought this one was interesting but was told it was just pixellations. I don't think it is. The argument was that it would be gigantic, covering several miles. the problem with that argument is, if it's not a human construct, we have no way of knowing what they consider big or little and/or what they deem necessary size for their purposes. seems to me, if they have anything to do with the megalithic builders, they were into big. heavy didn't mean anything to them either. pillars and stones weighing many tons were no big deal. so to say the size would be an argument against it, is well, it's really an unknown and an argument without the benefit of comparative analysis even.

Originally posted by Fowl Play
John, what are your theories of this image..
I apologized if its already been gone over, i have read the thread, but cannot remember

That image of the antenna masts was started in anoher thread... someone posted the answer in post #5 on page one... everyone ignored thta answer and it got to page 5 when Byrd awarded someone the "prize" for stating it was obviously a series of craters... LOL Shows how much people pay attention in threads... It wasn't until John identified it that they "got it" but even then there were still posts after trying to decide what it was.

In that image the antenna appears twice because it is a composite image.

As to the Disney one... that was part of the von Braun/ Walt Disney movie "front" for a base on the moon... make a move to hide the real base LOL

Worked too... But I will get to that next week... it is interesting to note that Disney/Lockheed are now working on an IMAX film about the Mars rovers

Originally posted by greatlakes
No, its an urban legend. It sounds good, but it really is just an anecdotal lesson that spawned into an urban legend. Its called "THE WRITE STUFF"

Sooo I post a funny little quote... you say NO and tell the same story?

Okay how weird is that?

Originally posted by undo
I've always thought this one was interesting but was told it was just pixellations. I don't think it is. The argument was that it would be gigantic, covering several miles.

You have a link to the/a original picture from the base Undo? Ive only seen the Clementine one, and this aint a Clementine picture as far as i can see.

Edit: Forgot to add, to me it would be logical to build as much in one place there as possible. So the bigger the better.

[edit on 19/6/2007 by Cygnific]

Wanted to point out that your "quote" (who would that quote be attributed to?) is from an urban legend and isn't from a true story, it never happened in REALITY. The story you refer to in my post is there to show the other versions of the fictional story that have been passed about from email to email...

Some that read your little story may think its real, as in it 'really happened' the way your quote says, which is FALSE.



[edit on 6/19/2007 by greatlakes]

Originally posted by greatlakes
No, its an urban legend.

Urban legend or not, i think the moral of the legend is that the Russians allways had a tendency to use cheaper (not meaning 'crap') materials/solutions to produce the same as the U.S. Not sure if it is the same these day's though.

Originally posted by johnlear
Here are 2 photos of Plato. The top one was taken by Clementine. The lower one was found in an astronomy book and was attributed to "NASA".

Look carefully at each photo. Look at the alleged 'shadows' and 'illuminated' areas. Compare the terrain. Then look at the 'alleged' crater floor of each picture. Notice how the crater floor in the Clementine photo 'merges' with the terrain and rising interior walls.

I get the impression that the crater floor is somehow 'floating' above the terrain as if it was a holograph.

I agree exactly about the floating crater Plato. Way back when, I got into a discussion on one of these threads about what I thought were floating craters on the Moon. This is my theory on the matter when you say holograms I believe they are just that a giant false projection or stealth overlays over an area the Moonbies or aliens do not want us to see.

No different then plasmonics that are used for faster brighter LEDs, much faster computers and not to mention scientists on Earth are working with this technology to create invisibility. We already know the Moon occupants would have technology way beyond what is used on Earth and we mostly have come to the conclusion we are shown and use outdated technology on purpose on Earth to continue the powers in control agenda. Rik Riley