NASA Scientist Fired - Promises Disclosure

Originally posted by housegroove23
Zorgon, are we really sure that these are the photo's that they have intended to release.

The first one showing the "blue light" came from the link James Oberg linked to at Dark Mission blog where it is on the Ken Johnston rebuttal to J.O's post

The one with the 'atmospheric glow' is a scan from the book "Dark Mission' that John purchased... so yes those are two

(The rest of the images are versions of the images they use obtained from NASA etc to use as comparison)

As to whether they have any other new ones they haven't posted on the site or printed in the book I do not know...

And I can't go reposting all their images or book scans for obvious reasons... I am not suggesting you run out and buy the book... but we can continue looking up the NASA image numbers and finding matching pictures...

The caveat to this is they can easily claim that the ones WE can find on the net are not the same as the 'private' ones they have... and that ours are tampered with by NASA



[edit on 11-12-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by tep200377

Just to give you a brief overview of our solarsystems moons:

earth 1
mars 2
jupiter 64
saturn 33
uranus 27
neptun 13
pluto 1

A grand total of 141 planetlike moons here in our solarsystem.
All are round and planetlike, except for one walnut shaped

That is not correct.

Iapetus has its equitorial ridge (and a slightly hexagonal shape to its' silhouette). Phobos and Deimos look like potatos. Hyperion looks like a yam.

Enceladus is nothing like any other "planetary body". it has been witnessed to have a cometary tail (making it a comet that is currently inactive...even though it isn't a dirty snowball. More on that in another thread).

The only thing that the system moons have in common is that they have nothing in common. The shapes are only occasionally similar.

If you get down to some of the lesser known moons in the Jovian system (Amalthea, Thebe, Metis) you see moons that are very similar in shape to the Martian potato-twins.

Do some checking...you are very incorrect.

Yup Protector of Sanity is absolutely correct They all look the same Although I have no idea why he brought it up or what it has to do with Hoagland's press release?

Sorry about this... but he tasks me... I tried to resist... but they are all so pretty

HYPERION



PHOBOS



PHOBOS BACK SIDE



DIEMOS WITH PHOBOS Yup Look like Potatoes



IO Fire and Brimstone with Electric Blue Fountains...



EUROPA Ball of Water with a frozen surface covered in dirt from meteors



GANYMEDE You should here the radio signals coming from this one



IAPETUS Shiny Metalic "Death Star" to be sure



IAPETUS Or this is Iapetus...



TITAN I hear they found some cool things beneath these clouds





[edit on 11-12-2007 by zorgon]

Sulfides in dust can cause those blue streaks during developing I believe. Sulfides are kept in film processing labs for a different process and if I understood right a tiny residue in the tank can cause troubles. Government Employees are not exactly motivated to do superior work. Also in the older scanners or some of the cheap-o's now I believe, scratches can cause that. It has something to do with how the light interacts with the scratch while going through the scanners roller. I'm talking about a dedicated negative scanner and not normal home scanner. Either way I've seen that before. Nothing to do with the Moon though.

reply to post by zorgon


I think you should say, seeing that you were talking about colours, that the second photo you posted, the one from Mike Deegan, is not the original look of the photo, it had its brigthness changed.

And you shouldn't post Phobos back side, it may be against ATS' T&C, posting that kind of photos

Originally posted by ArMaP
it had its brigthness changed.

Come come ArMaP It says that plainly on the page I have it on and the link to the full size has NOT been 'brightened'

But then I suppose no one follows links

As to the backside... I am sure they will let it slip just this once

Well I for one would like to express my appreciation, zorgon, for denying ignorance and aknowledging that Bara and Hoagland have presented one pretty anemic case. Maybe they should consult with you in the future, instead of some aggrandized photo filer.

As I once said to Mitt Romney, I may not walk a mile in your magic underwear, but I hope you always keep the faith, bro.

Just kidding. I've never met Mitt Romney.

Originally posted by housegroove23
After awaking to the truth that there really is an atmosphere on the moon, Naza's lies are blatantly obvious when I walk outside and look at the moon, and the moon looks planet like

Oh my God, the Moon is round! It's like a sphere! What an astute observation, housegroove. Kudos.

If we were to believe the lies and the image of boring lifeless black & gray moon that Naza portrays in their photos then the moon would look more like your standard asteroid when you look up in the night sky instead of planet like, the way it looks now.

I can understand that you get bored with lifeless gray moon. Tough luck, buddy. The Moon looks fairly gray even to an uninstrumented eye. Ergo, it's pretty gray.

Zorgon,

You jump on me with both feet cuz I don't get your 'joke'?!?

Don't you think posting silly obvious nonsense is going to decrease your credibility? It's not funny, it just wastes server space (as a Mod told me when I got a 20-point slap for 'quoting' too much..."Our Server only has so much room...").

SO, which is it? Fill up the Server with nonsense graphics (use much more 'bytes' than text, me thinks) or continue to present valid info?

BTW, there's a Zorgon post somewhere, a large one, done twice.

AND, finally (sorry for the caps), please, with respect, do not rail against skeptics. Isn't that the point of a debate? One party argues for, one against. As long as it's civil, then it's a debate. When it gets ugly, it's an argument. (See Monty Python's Flying Circus for a great example...)

Cheers!

[edit for a p.s.]

PS...I'm (and I can only speak for myself) only skeptical (sceptical?) until I see something that obviously contradicts currently understood science. Perhaps I have a blind spot (we all do, it's where the retinal nerve attaches to the back of the eyeball) and will be harder to convince, but I want to see it, feel it and touch it...or at least see some hard imperical evidence, not just 'hear say' remote viewing. (I have looked into the idea of RV, and can see its validity...but perhaps sometimes the conclusions reached by the 'viewers' can be influenced by their own biases...?).

[edit on 11-12-2007 by weedwhacker]

zorgon, weedwhacker has a valid point.

If we get chastised (ouch brutal term) for quoting too much of another member's post because it uses too much wind, shouldn't it be incumbant upon us to eschew the byte-sucking practice of posting photos, and their accompanying text, that serve only as a nudge to the smallest ribs, not as a contribution to a serious debate?

The photos are great! But aren't a tad off-topic and expensive for the Amigos' to host in this thread?

I understand wanting to drive ol' Betsy off-topic once in a while just to see what's out there. But sheesh. Not at 10 bucks a gallon and on someone else's account.

I'm not referring to the "green moon" photo, btw. That was on-topic. But the Jovian moons + Titan photos may have required a bit more room on the server than they'd earned for the purposes of this thread.

Now, having spoken my piece, I shall take up no more...

Originally posted by Tuning Spork
zorgon, weedwhacker has a valid point.

He does? Maybe I missed it? Oh wait my bad its the one about 'thread policing ' he makes in just about every post in just about every thread...

If we get chastised (ouch brutal term) for quoting too much of another member's post because it uses too much wind, shouldn't it be incumbant upon us to eschew the byte-sucking practice of posting photos,

"byte-sucking: photos... now that IS funny... but the bytes that are sucked are not at ATS they are at my server or NASA's and both those have a LOT of bytes (I think NASA has a few more than me ) And as I pay for mine and you all pay for NASA's well....

a contribution to a serious debate?

Serious debate? Hmmm most of what I see is a number of self proclaimed 'experts' constantly telling us how crazy we are, have no understanding of science etc etc.. These same arguments appear in thread after thread with no real change... so I post one funny images and catch them off guard and what happens... they get miffed...

I will admit the images of the other moons was a 'whim' but you see once in a while even I get tired of the 'wanna be experts' and succumb to human nature with an 'in your face' Won't happen again got it outta my system... please continue the same old retoric...

Or we can go back to talking about Hoagland's presentation

The photos are great! But aren't a tad off-topic and expensive for the Amigos' to host in this thread?

Please see above....

I understand wanting to drive ol' Betsy off-topic once in a while just to see what's out there. But sheesh. Not at 10 bucks a gallon and on someone else's account.

Please see above....

I'm not referring to the "green moon" photo, btw. That was on-topic. But the Jovian moons + Titan photos may have required a bit more room on the server than they'd earned for the purposes of this thread.

Please see above....

Hmmm four times in the same post...

Just kidding. I've never met Mitt Romney.

Who or what is a Mitt Romney

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Don't you think posting silly obvious nonsense is going to decrease your credibility?

No its called comic relief... Resorting to the same tactics as those with a constant barrage of insulting comments would (and has) given me warnings...

So sue me if I chose a different 'escape' route Funny thing is it worked... a few of you guys did me proud and swallowed hook line and sinker...

Credibilty? What's that?