It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
2. SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
The following sections describe the components needed in order for ISIS to operate properly on your computer system. Please read each section carefully to reduce problems during the installation procedure and when utilizing ISIS.
The USGS Astrogeology Team supports ISIS under the requirements given below. WARNING: Failure to meet these requirements may render ISIS unusable.
2.1 OPERATING SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
The following operating systems, compilers, and third party software products are acceptable:
LinuxREQUIREMENTS
We have run extensive tests of ISIS binaries built on PC (Intel/AMD chipsets) under SuSE 9.0. The binaries have been successfully tested on the following Linux distributions:
RedHat 9
RedHat Enterprise Linux WS Release 3
RedHat Enterprise Linux WS Release 4
SuSE 8.2
SuSE 9.0
SuSE 9.3
SuSE 10.0
SuSE 10.1
* * Note that other Linux distributions may work but have not been tested.
Originally posted by TruthTellist
You have just received a free trip to my ignore list.
Thank you for not contributing anything.
Originally posted by Sator
Man, I just cannot look at this picture now and NOT see what has been highlighted here by member watchZEITGEISTnow on the 4th page:
Originally posted by PistolPete
..
How come I never see a single thing that "Mike Singh" ever posts? All I ever see is friggin rocks, and then maybe some rocks with photoshopped lines around them?
I look and @%@^ing look, but all I ever see is rocks or geologic features?!! Isn't my mind "open" enough?
I mean for Christ-sakes, I can search Google Earth for silly looking formations and claim whatever about them. That shadow on Mt. Ararat must be Noah's @%#*ing Ark, right?
It's unreal.
Because rocks and shadows look like something doesn't mean they are. Or that we have to open our mind to believe what they might be.
I bought into this crap for a long time. I can't believe any one that follows this garbage is a "Conspiracy Master". Emphasis on the quotes.
...
Rocks and shadows.
.
Originally posted by lingk007
I'm no "techie", but wouldn't it be possible to analyze the surface of the moon via a satellite, much like when you zoom in with 'google earth' ??
I can see plainly my van parked in my driveway with google earth, so I'd imagine one could do the same with the moon. Question is......Is there any satellite facing the surface of the moon ????
And, if there are images, they are blurred-out like the ones you get over places like area-51, dulce base, etc.
If anyone can find real-time images of the moon surface, then we could be in business.
Originally posted by PistolPeteI look and @%@^ing look, but all I ever see is rocks or geologic features?!! Isn't my mind "open" enough?
How come I never see a single thing that "Mike Singh" ever posts? All I ever see is friggin rocks, and then maybe some rocks with photoshopped lines around them?
You may as well let one of those people that smear Obama but do it well be a "Conspiracy Master".
I own a lamp. My fingers look like a flying butterfly right now. I have several images to prove it. I have a new species of Butterfly. It spins webs of gold and turns into a hummingbird when it dies. Just check these shadows out....
Originally posted by zorgon
I just found this picture at NASA... and we all know NASA never lies
How Michael. J. Tuttle faked the Apollo Moon pictures.
apollofake.bravehost.com...
apollofake.bravehost.com/
This web page will reveal how Michael J Tuttle manipulated, (doctored), pictures from the so called Apollo training simulations, then posted them on NASA web sites as being genuine pictures taken on the Apollo Moon missions. I regularly get e-mail from PAN's claiming that digital manipulation of photo's was not available back in 1969. Sheesh. People have been creating fake photographs ever since the camera was invented, and who is saying the pictures were taken back in 69 anyway? PAN's cannot seem to get it into their pea sized brains the fact that THE MAJORITY OF NASA's FAKE MOON PICTURES WERE CREATED IN THE MID 90's. Ninety five percent of NASA's fake Moon pictures on their web site WERE NEVER SEEN PRIOR TO THE LAUNCH OF THE INTERNET. They had to produce a considerable number of fake Moon pics, otherwise the public would want to know why there were so few. I would also like to point out to the PAN's that NOT ALL fake Moon pictures were digitally manipulated. The controversial picture of Aldrin has not been digitally tampered with, and there were a number of pictures taken in the fake Moonscape scene at Langley, which did not require any alteration to pass it off as a Moon picture.
Originally posted by AntisepticSkeptic
NOT ONE. Now I know you conspiracy theorists are going to scream: "MKUltra! " "Mind control! " "NASA gag order " and other ridiculous baseless illogical and sometimes idiotic claims with nothing to back them up other than make belief and wishful thinking.[edit on 19-8-2008 by AntisepticSkeptic]