Our Moon is an Artificial Space Station ~~~ PROOF!!!

This thread reminds me of the youtube video/documentary/blow your mind epic known as "Moon Rising"..
The colors, the landscape, and the beauty of the moon are far and away something we can never truly know.
Thus I can see it being an artificial product to sustain life here..however, Earth is the most beautiful planet known to man, so our closes celestial body must be pretty close to that.

If not artificial, it has to have been very rare to have the moon as it is naturally. The moon is roughly 1/4 the size of the Earth, so the odds of the moon randomly getting sucked up into earths gravity and having a near perfect orbit around it is unusual. Although according to the giant impact hypothesis, an object 1/2 the size of the Earth (roughly the size of mars) named Theia hit the earth and basically was destroyed. the heavier elements (ex: iron) were pulled into the earth, which explains the low amount of Fe found in the rocks from the moon. Over time, all the debris from the impact combined and became the moon. keep in mind this is just a very vague overview of the process.


More on the giant impact hypothesis.
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Mactire


Dude...firstly, I watched the Apollo missions LIVE, on my television machine. At my Dad's. It was summer, he had custody of me when school was out for summer. I started 7th grade that Fall.

Secondly, I looked at the first link and just groaned. Can't believe you fell for that, it's been debunked LONG ago. This part:

NASA: What's there? Mission Control calling Apollo 11...

Apollo: These "Babies" are huge, Sir! Enormous! OH MY GOD! You wouldn't believe it! I'm telling you there are other spacecraft out there, lined up on the far side of the crater edge! They're on the Moon watching us!

"Mission Control calling Apollo 11" my butt!!!

I forget who hoaxed that little NON_exchange...but they did it poorly. AND THE REST?? Attributed to Armstrong (or either of them)??? Baloney. I fear that if the rest of that website is equally jacked up, then it fails the credibility test.

Very intersting thread...

Since we are throwing concepts and supposition about, I think I'll toss an idea out that "popped" into my head about this subject...

The moon was made by the planetoidal collision of a body consisting of dense metal (mostly nickle) the size of...
well...about the size of the planet Mercury...

The result being the earths magnetic nickle core...(which Iv'e heard protects us a bit from the not-so-friendly environment of space.)

Splashes often throw up a hollow ball of ejecta...which, (if a further ball of the remnant metals formed inside a lighter ball of silica), could account for that "ringing bell" sound the astronouts heard?

Water collision Models

Perhaps Mercury could be waiting to do the exact same thing to Venus when the sun cools off a bit...

Maybe Mars is the remnant of one completed cycle of this entire process of planetary biological evolution?

If there are NEE's (Near Earth Extraterrestrials), the moon, (made or formed...or both), would be a perfect place to observe the evolutionary process...


And you must admit that it is suspisciously synchronistic to have the moon making such a grand display of near exact solar eclipse at just the right time in our technological evolution, where we can take note, and try to understand, the possible significance of this...

When talking about astronomy, then astronomical coincidences aren't really that unusual. (like the size/distance of the Sun and Moon)....

The Moon rotates once each revolution because it is tidally locked to Earth. All of the major moons in the Solar System are tidally locked to their planets and exhibit the same behavior.

Yep, it'd be more surprising if it DIDN'T behave that way....

There really is no science that says that intelligent life evolved because "the moon eclipses the sun periodically" or because "the moon is exactly a certain amount of mass" or because "the moon is tidally locked to the Earth". Are you seriously thinking that intelligent life arose simply because the moon always looks the same!?

Originally posted by Truth_B_Told
I believe there are too many "coincidences" for our moon to be a natural object.

I'm not sure we know enough about the universe to claim that our relationship with our moon is a coincidence. The distance/size may have a scientific relationship we are yet to understand. Understanding the age of the moon in relation to other bodies in our solar system will hold valuable clues when dicerning it's origin, natural or not.

In addition to the OP, the title is massively misleading, although worthy of debate the points are hardly proof of an artificial space station imo.

Originally posted by digitalf

Originally posted by Truth_B_Told
I believe there are too many "coincidences" for our moon to be a natural object.

In addition to the OP, the title is massively misleading, although worthy of debate the points are hardly proof of an artificial space station imo.

I agree. Although some evidence is presented, none of it is hardly proof, just coincidences that can be explained naturally. I'm not ruling out that the moon could be artificial, I just believe that it is more than likely not.

reply to post by weedwhacker


Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were quoted in a book about the Apollo 11 mission titled (coincidentally enough) 'Above Top Secret'.

There are also the reports by Otto Binder, and Maurice Chatelain who worked for NASA during the Apollo campaigns. In 1979 Maurice Chatelain, former chief of NASA Communications Systems confirmed that Armstrong had indeed reported seeing two UFOs on the rim of a crater. "The encounter was common knowledge
in NASA," he revealed, "but nobody has talked about it until now." Soviet scientists were allegedly the first to confirm the incident. "According to our information, the encounter was reported immediately after the landing of the module," said Dr. Vladimir Azhazha, a physicist and Professor of Mathematics at Moscow University. "Neil Armstrong relayed the message to Mission Control that two large, mysterious objects were watching them after having landed near the moon module. But his message was never heard by the public - because NASA censored it. "According to another Soviet scientist, Dr. Aleksandr Kazantsev, Buss Aldrin took color movie film of the UFOs from inside the module, and continued filming them after he and Armstrong went outside. Dr. Azhazha claims that the UFOs departed minutes after the astronauts came out on to the lunar surface.
I'm not saying you didn't see the event on tv, but you think you're seeing Camera angle 1 or Camera Angle 7 when you watched that footage. Neither Nasa nor the Government would allow "Alien Craft" to appear on national television.

There are many theories of where the moon actually came from. The aspect that is interesting in this matter is that the composition of the surface of the moon very much resembles what we find here on earth (One of the more recent theories is one that describes how the moon was 'born' out of the earth at a certain point in time). I see no proof at all in this topic; it being a 'space station' is probably one of the more unlikely theories on the origin of the moon

reply to post by Mactire

Otto Binder did not work for NASA.
en.wikipedia.org...

Maurice Chatelain was not "former chief of NASA Communications Systems".
www.ronrecord.com...

The story is completely bogus.

reply to post by woogleuk


It's not cost mate.

Although it sounds as good an excuse as any i suppose.

The US military simply *lost* about 2-3 TRILLION dollars over a 3 year period...if they were all about money, they'd keep better track of the stuff.

They could have a few Lunar bases for that sort of money, which for the US military who don't seem too bothered about finding it again, could be considered 'down the back of the sofa' money.

Then there's the cost of the wars the US is currently engaged in.

More trillions wasted...

Nah, it's not about lack of money.

reply to post by Phage


Here's my two cents. You have an ex-Nasa communications employee turned whistle-blower on Top Secret information. As a journalist or author doing research, you decide to contact his former employers, and then BELIEVE anything that they say. Of course they're going to debunk his claims, and possibly alter his record. And I didn't say Otto was a Nasa Employee. The coma [,] should've illustrated that.

reply to post by sp00n1


Or maybe the Universe is an intelligent design in and of itself?

A space station just seems a little bit to random. I do believe however the moon is purposely there for the Earth and the well being of the inhabitants.

The shear perfection of the Universe both microcosmic and microcosmic should give at least a hint to the Universe itself being intelligent and with purpose.

In the words of Jack Sparrow, "I wash my hands of this weirdness."

[2nd Line]

reply to post by Mactire


Well, sorry but from investigating the Apollo missions, and their timelines, extensively, I have to shrug my shoulders at most of those claims...I don't know whether they are the result of urban legends, creative imagination, or what else.

And, wished to mention, back to the claim that amateur Ham radio operators heard that "Mission Control" exchange ("These babies are huge, sir!!") is still laughable....however, as it is allegedly related by those Ham Radio enthusiasts, maybe they are paraphrasing, because none of the dialogue they say they heard is how CapCom (Mission Control's "handle" was, simply, "Houston") and the Astronauts would speak. Apollo 11's callsigns were "Columbia", until the LM disconnected, then there were TWO spacecraft...and when they wished to address the LM, its callsign was "Eagle".

Anyway, before we leave this topic (because, really....the "alien presence", even IF it is factual, does not necessarily imply that the Moon is "artificial", as this thread posits. An ET race certainly could come visit, and decide to "camp out" on our natural satellite, given its location and convenient tidal-locked behavior). Before we leave this, I'm doubtful about the Ham story, in general. About "overhearing". WIll have to research actual frequencies used.

Also, the timelines. Here is an example, from shortly after Neil stepped off the pad, onto the surface, until Buzz began to exit the LM. It is a compilation of the videos and 16mm films. The 16mm film camera (one) was called the "DAC" (Data Acquisition Camera), and here they merely say "sequence camera", mounted inside the LM, and stayed there the whole time.

Note those numbers are MET - "MIssion Elapsed Time", in Hour:Min:Sec: and refer to points in the Surface Journal text:

109:23:25 to 109:25:00. QuickTime Video Clip: (1 minute 20 seconds; 4.0MB).

Sequence camera wide-angle film clip of Neil's first step, including the full length (about 15 meters) of the lunar module's shadow across the ground.
109:23:38 to 109:25:00. QuickTime Video Clip: (55 seconds; 2.3MB).

Television clip of Neil's first step.
109:25:30. RealVideo Clip: (2 minutes 38 seconds).

109:26:54 to 109:27:44. QuickTime Video Clip: (50 seconds; 2.3MB).

Buzz begins passing the Hasselblad camera down to Neil using the lunar equipment conveyor (“clothesline”). 16mm film clip.
109:28:01. RealVideo Clip: (2 minutes 55 seconds).

109:30:53. RealVideo Clip: (2 minutes 38 seconds).

109:33:25. RealVideo Clip: (2 minutes 48 seconds).

109:33:25 to 109:34:09. QuickTime Video Clip: (44 seconds; 2.8MB).

Buzz adjusts the sequence camera angle and records Neil beginning his contingency sample collection. 16mm film clip.
109:33:27 to 109:37:22. QuickTime Video Clip: (3 minutes 49 seconds; 7.2MB).

Armstrong scoops a few contingency surface samples, removes the sample bag from the end of the collector handle, and puts it in the pocket on his thigh. 16mm film clip.
109:34:09. QuickTime Video Clip: (44 seconds; 2.9MB).

Neil scoops surface samples and rocks while describing the difficulty of digging deeper than a few inches. Dust is easily seen spraying from his boots as he kicks against the topsoil. 16mm film clip.
109:34:54 to 109:35:35. QuickTime Video Clip: (41 seconds; 2.9MB).

Neil replies to Buzz's comment about how beautifully the sample collection is going by remarking on the beauty of the moon and goes on to describe the rocks he's collecting. 16mm film clip.
109:35:43. QuickTime Video Clip: (50 seconds; 3.4MB).

Buzz and Neil discuss how far the sampler handle penetrates the surface. Neil throws away the ring from the contingency sample collection bag and Buzz and he are amused by how far it travels. 16mm film clip.
109:35:56. QuickTime Video Clip: (4 seconds; 0.9MB).

Closeup of Neil tossing the collection bag ring away over his right shoulder. 16mm film clip.
109:36:07. RealVideo Clip: (1 minutes 59 seconds).

109:36:33. QuickTime Video Clip: (46 seconds; 3.2MB).

Buzz adjusts the sequence camera angle again. Neil struggles to secure the contingency sample bag in his thigh pocket but has difficulty because he can't bend enough to see it. Buzz offers instructions from his perspective through the lunar module window and the sample is pocketed successfully. 16mm film clip.
109:36:47. QuickTime Video Clip: (5 seconds; 0.8MB).

Neil's helmet visor is up and his face is visible. Brief 16mm film clip.
109:37:30 to 110:48:10. QuickTime Film: (1 hour 10 minutes 40 seconds; 11.6MB).

Apollo 11 EVA - 1 Frame Per Second - 16mm DAC - July 20, 1969 by Gary Neff, source footage courtesy John Knoll. No sound.
Just before leaving the lunar module, Buzz set the 16mm DAC (data acquisition camera, or sequence camera) to run at one frame per second. The camera was pointing down at the lunar surface from inside Buzz's lunar module window. During the following one hour ten minute sequence, the astronauts perform a variety of surface activities, both within and beyond camera range. When they are off-camera, their dense, sharply-defined shadows often remain visible, their activities obvious, and the action is like a silent Asian shadow-puppet theatre.

Apollo 11 Lunar Surface Journal, selected from the sub-menu: "Video and Movies"

Also, found the official transcript, covers the same timeframe, to show their radio communications to each other, and MC. (A lot of the dialogue will be in the videos, from the other link above, and should coincide).

history.nasa.gov...

I'll keep looking at it, but since the DAC remained in the LM (we can see the footage it filmed) and I see no obvious gaps in communications, if they went off the "public" frequencies....so >shrug

Originally posted by JoshuaTree
reply to post by sp00n1

 

The question begs to be asked why we have not set up a moon base yet?Why have we not landed on the moon again?Were we in fact told by ebe's to leave and never return?could the moon in fact be a moon base for ebe's?This would make their travel to earth much faster than traveling light years across the cosmos,that is assuming they are not time travelers or interdemensional beings that travel thru worm holes or folds in space or what have you.NASA recently slammed a crater into the moon supposedly searching for frozen water particles,is this a cover up?were we attempting something else?Have we been watched very closely by ebe's when we are in orbit espeacialy on or around the moon?How many photos of the moons surface have been airbrushed to cover up structures and etc.?So much is left untold about our moon.

edit on 27-10-2010 by JoshuaTree because: signature

You said it for me man. Those are all questions that lead to more questions. I have to agree with OP and You. There are way too many COINCIDENCES for this to be "Natural"

Can someone point me to the proof in this thread?

Because someone saying it does "exactly" this and so on, really doesn't mean much.

Interesting theory atleast, but in my opinion not enough "proof" to consider it as a true possibility.

If the moon were hollow, wouldn't our tides be weaker? I'm sure someone good with math and Newtonian physics could figure it out...mass n' distance, n' inverse square law, and all that nonsense.