Is John Lear Spreading Disinfo?

Originally posted by undo

You mean you don't want to see the original, even after telling me that...
www.thestargates.com...

If you look closely at the upper left quadrant of the moon in this picture we can see that there is a "star" shining in front of the moon. Are stars now the size of large houses? Oh, let me guess... the light was bent and pulled around the moon because it has an atmosphere

What is ATS without a little controversy? That is John Lear's job here, along with the likes of sleeper, might as well throw undo in there too.

I have an EBE tied up in my backyard. I bring him rats every night and he feeds off of their souls. The energy is used to quantize the holographic projection of the world and Human beings to be limited to stupidity, thus the EBE can precisely calculate, manipulate and control all souls entering and leaving the moon's breathable atmosphere.

The extra-terrestrials created the known uni-verse and some times they come in the form of Human beings. They also control our technology through the likes of famous inventors such as the Wright Brothers et al.

Don't believe me? Ask John Sleeper... ahhem, Sleep Lear... I mean... ah, whatever their names are.

But hey! I guess I'm helping poor more hydrocarbons on the torchering and raping of Human consciousness... slow burn... take it easy, eventual spontaneous combustion within the minds of Humanity.

It's sick, but I guess you're getting paid for it or getting a kick out of it. Ruining someone else's day always the chief concern of the depressed and sick. 'Come join me in my demented megalomania, I'll pull you under and you'll become my puppet'. It's politcal debauchery

[edit on 30-4-2007 by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal]

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Kind of reminds me of this view of the beginnings of electrical discharge on the comet Tempel:

I don't think that's an electrical discharge at all. I seem to remember Tempel 1 being the target of NASA's Deep Impact mission. I think what you have there is a picture of the Deep Impact probe striking the comet, or at least the results thereof.

[edit on 30/4/07 by Implosion]

Originally posted by Implosion
I think what you have there is a picture of the Deep Impact probe striking the comet, or at least the results thereof.

That's exactly what it is.

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal

What is ATS without a little controversy? That is John Lear's job here, along with the likes of sleeper, might as well throw undo in there too.

Bit of an over-reaction, it seems. You're also assuming things that I haven't said. You don't know my position on Sleeper. Even Sleeper doesn't know my position on Sleeper.

What's your problem, anyway? You don't even know me, and you're assuming all this extra info, trying to stuff me in any little cubby hole you can find, so long as it looks as bad as possible and makes you look like Mr. Sarcasm. And this over whether or not the moon has an atmosphere/smoke/fog/steam/dust swirling around, blowing around/and/or covering the images? You know a simple, "I don't see it" or "I see it" or "I'm not sure what I'm seeing" would've sufficed.

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
If you look closely at the upper left quadrant of the moon in this picture we can see that there is a "star" shining in front of the moon. Are stars now the size of large houses?

Oh, let me guess... the light was bent and pulled around the moon because it has an atmosphere

LOVE, could you please circle what you are calling a 'star'? Does it have 4 points? There are a number of bright objects in the "upper left quadrant", I just want to be sure what it is you are calling a 'star'. Thanks.

if john lear is spreading disinfo wouldnt he be posting more believable stuff? some of johns thoughts and beliefs are so far out there (and i respect them a great deal) that it makes me wonder who would be putting him up to such obscure disinformation

i mean look at all these people here that think his claims are absolutley nuts, is that the kind of disinfo you would want to be spread if you, in fact, wanted disinformation spreaded?

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
If you look closely at the upper left quadrant of the moon in this picture we can see that there is a "star" shining in front of the moon. Are stars now the size of large houses?

Oh, let me guess... the light was bent and pulled around the moon because it has an atmosphere

LOVE, could you please circle what you are calling a 'star'? Does it have 4 points? There are a number of bright objects in the "upper left quadrant", I just want to be sure what it is you are calling a 'star'. Thanks.

Hey John Im pretty sure that poster is referring to the film location +'s but I could be wrong. What I do find interesting in the link undo posted of that pic is the uniforn rectangular outlines in the larger crater in the upper left of that image. Very interesting indeed.

[edit on 30-4-2007 by VType]

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
If you look closely at the upper left quadrant of the moon in this picture we can see that there is a "star" shining in front of the moon. Are stars now the size of large houses?

Oh, let me guess... the light was bent and pulled around the moon because it has an atmosphere

LOVE, could you please circle what you are calling a 'star'? Does it have 4 points? There are a number of bright objects in the "upper left quadrant", I just want to be sure what it is you are calling a 'star'. Thanks.

Hey John Im pretty sure that poster is referring to the film location +'s but I could be wrong. What I do find interesting in the link undo posted of that pic is the uniforn rectangular outlines in the larger crater in the upper left of that image. Very interesting indeed.

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
If you look closely at the upper left quadrant of the moon in this picture we can see that there is a "star" shining in front of the moon. Are stars now the size of large houses?

Oh, let me guess... the light was bent and pulled around the moon because it has an atmosphere

LOVE, could you please circle what you are calling a 'star'? Does it have 4 points? There are a number of bright objects in the "upper left quadrant", I just want to be sure what it is you are calling a 'star'. Thanks.

Hey John Im pretty sure that poster is referring to the film location +'s but I could be wrong. What I do find interesting in the link undo posted of that pic is the uniforn rectangular outlines in the larger crater in the upper left of that image. Very interesting indeed.

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
If you look closely at the upper left quadrant of the moon in this picture we can see that there is a "star" shining in front of the moon. Are stars now the size of large houses?

Oh, let me guess... the light was bent and pulled around the moon because it has an atmosphere

LOVE, could you please circle what you are calling a 'star'? Does it have 4 points? There are a number of bright objects in the "upper left quadrant", I just want to be sure what it is you are calling a 'star'. Thanks.

Hey John Im pretty sure that poster is referring to the film location +'s but I could be wrong. What I do find interesting in the link undo posted of that pic is the uniforn rectangular outlines in the larger crater in the upper left of that image. Very interesting indeed.

Originally posted by Implosion
What are you, the thought police? How do you expect anyone to take anything you say seriously when you show such contempt for the opinions of others?

Please try not to twist my words into your own morbid point. Opinions are wonderfull and again it serves no purpose to start a thread or feed into one by simply bashing someone as usefull as John is.

I dont have contempt for peoples opinions, I have contempt for those that use the post button as a means to put someone down or attempt to discredit them without a shred of proof.

Feel free to refer to me as the thought police all you want. If someone starts a thread up about you and it turns into a bashing ground against you I will speak against that also. I just can't see how 90% of this thread is anything but counter productive.

Zorgon,
You got an address for me for those hummer folks?

~Thought Police

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
You handle people admirably, John. I have spent enough time reading you to know about the merits of your works, but you seem to have solid character. I would advise using your Ignore feature.

Well said. I'm off to the Lunar Anomalies thread now so anyone who wants to get something productive done in that respect feel free to come on over.

~Anathema

I was looking through YouTube and came across a video that was added on April 25, 2007. It may have been posted before, but I really like how the evidence is presented. I would love to see the non compressed version of this video.

I do believe there is water, vegetation, structures, and more there.
I hope you all enjoy this video.

Originally posted by kleverone

It doens't help that people like Zorgon come in and try and blast everyone for questioning the fact that there is atomsphere on the moon but fails to either see or acknowledge that John claims it to be breathable,

I don't blast anyone, I merely showed that NASA and others know full well that there is an atmosphere, and I most certainly know that John thinks that it is breathable for a short time... And I answered you that I personally do not know this for a fact at this time...

But your right actually it doesn't help that I come in here LOL It truly is a waste of time...

I have an idea, since you are so quick to bash us with a condescending attitude, why don't you go do us a big favor, call Richard Branson, reserve a seat on his ship, have him drop you off and the moon and take a real deep breath. Let us know, I won't hold my breath

Well I have a better idea... I will wait for the Pegasus team to finish their ship and have a front seat...

zorgon: "By the way, John's theory about the US having anti gravity tech for decades? Thats just been backed up by Boyd Bushman from Lockheed... and his father work with TT Brown on such projects... All this is independently confirmable if you just bother to actually LOOK "
_____________

Bushman's stuff (that he publicly says) I know a bit about. Hey zorgon would you provide supportive links re Bushman backing up john lear's theories on anti-grav technology? Thanks.

In my opinion anti-grav or grav-manipulation exists prosaic-wise. I really believe Lazar had some serious inside knowledge, as I do with Burisch's coming out.
Seems to me this stuff was not an earthling original, but an earthling present technological version of EBE science.


Regards

Dallas

Originally posted by Implosion
I think what you have there is a picture of the Deep Impact probe striking the comet, or at least the results thereof

Umm...no. Now, see how your debunking works? You make one heck of a leap of faith to state that you think this might be, could be...no different than my assertion that it might be, could be.

So...what is the explanation for this one?




The image is from a different angle, and there are multiple electrical eruptions on the left picture. The one on the right, you can see the bright spots developing on the peaks. It is brighter than the natural sunlight striking the area around it.

Note, also, that his DOES NOT look like a dirty snowball to me. It looks more like Iron or granite than snowy anything...but maybe that is just me?

Here is one (Wild2) with tons of electrical machining. once again, nothing at all like a dirty snowball:




In this one, on the right, you can see the active cathode arcs that, when fully active, create the tail of the comet:




Once again, with Deep Impact there was nothing indicative of a dirty snowball. Least of all, the pictures. And, once again, look at how bright that electrical discharge is on the lower left corner.

There are more...but this will do for now.

The point of this is, you are debunking carelessly. You should really, really think about why you have the stance you have. It is more productive to see things in levels of probability rather than to disbelieve anything. Use your newfound information to adjust how probable you think any "fact" is. That is my strategy. I believe nothing is true, but all things have a level of probability that I can apply to them based on my experience and knowledge.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan

Umm...no. Now, see how your debunking works? You make one heck of a leap of faith to state that you think this might be, could be...no different than my assertion that it might be, could be.

I've never thought of myself as a "debunker", I just like to help people see the truth when I find myself in a position to do so. As for the rest of your post, seems you have your mind made up already, so... whatever.

[edit on 30/4/07 by Implosion]

Yikes...sorry, Implosion. I re-read my posting and it sounded pretty acidic. Definitely not intended. I apologize.

Originally posted by LastOutfiniteVoiceEternal
If you look closely at the upper left quadrant of the moon in this picture we can see that there is a "star" shining in front of the moon. Are stars now the size of large houses?

Oh, let me guess... the light was bent and pulled around the moon because it has an atmosphere

What "star" are you talking about? I see no star in front of the moon... are you perhaps referring to the bright cross like thing? Because that is a fudicial mark, a mark scratched into the glass on the camera and there are lots of them on that image... if this isn't what you meant please point it out to us, thanks