The Moon is Artificial I can see the wierd structure with the telescope and camera clearly...bunker

reply to post by CosmicCitizen


Aha but that was exactly what Han-solo said whe....

Nevermind

reply to post by Human_Alien



As far as gravity goes; there are many contributing factors for gravity, thus not one simple answer. The planets revolve around a star, that star also rotates as well. The entire solar system revolves as well. These forces have an influence on gravity. The earth’s core also affects the gravity we experience here on our planet.

The moon is moving away from the Earth, which would mean that sometime into the future of this planet, the moon will no longer be there.

The Moon's a Balloon !
Source :- David Niven !

The End

reply to post by NorkiSpaceDuck


Jesus Christ

first of all don't include yourself in any of your video clips, it does not lend credibility to your given subject.

what you are seeing is the result of low res images being filtered in photo shop.

the jpeg compression artifacts are the so called structures you think your seeing.

get a grip and go back to school

I don't believe that the moon is a artificial moon. But that doesn't mean there isn't something on there. It's not like NASA, or the government is reallly all that forth comming about how things look. Plus i thought it weird, that we went there planted a flag, and took a couple other visits and left. Honestly if there wasn't something off, then why isn't there a US base, or station on the moon Then again maybe there is Because i'm sure it would be a total shock to everyone here if we found out that the government lied to us about something.

Judging from the "evidence" presented, it's pretty clear to me that the Moon is a big rock with crater marks all over it.

I am not saying it is that. I am just saying that's what it Looks like.

reply to post by spikey


With respect, Ive not heard this theory or story before. Mars could have been a living breathing planet a couple of billion years ago. Its much smaller than earth so would of cooled down a lot earlier in its planetory evolution giving the posabilty of life a much earlier advantage. But becuase its smaller ,its core would have cooled down a lot quicker, therefor loosing its precious magnetic field that protects any kind of life,organic and creature from the suns deadly radiation and such. I cant see Mars being a stepping stone for life on earth, but i dont rule out intelligent life living Mars for a few thousand years ago.Plus , Mars is more likley a moon for a much larger planet that is now the asteroid belt that orbits around the sun between Mars and Jupiter. The asteroid belt has no place in the formation of a soler system. Its has to be a destroy planet that would have had a moon/satalite or two locked around its orbit.......Mars possibly.
With respect, what do think?

I know that Nasa is TPTB but I found this on their website.

NASA Research Team Reveals Moon Has Earth-Like Core

01.06.11 An artist's rendering of the lunar core as identified in new findings by a NASA-led research team. (NASA/MSFC/Renee Weber) A close-up view of the Passive Seismic Experiment, a component of the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package (ALSEP) which was deployed on the Moon by the Apollo 14 astronauts during their first extravehicular activity (EVA-1). (NASA/JSC)

Renee Weber. (NASA/MSFC) State-of-the-art seismological techniques applied to Apollo-era data suggest our moon has a core similar to Earth's.

Uncovering details about the lunar core is critical for developing accurate models of the moon's formation. The data sheds light on the evolution of a lunar dynamo -- a natural process by which our moon may have generated and maintained its own strong magnetic field.

The team's findings suggest the moon possesses a solid, iron-rich inner core with a radius of nearly 150 miles and a fluid, primarily liquid-iron outer core with a radius of roughly 205 miles. Where it differs from Earth is a partially molten boundary layer around the core estimated to have a radius of nearly 300 miles. The research indicates the core contains a small percentage of light elements such as sulfur, echoing new seismology research on Earth that suggests the presence of light elements -- such as sulfur and oxygen -- in a layer around our own core.

www.nasa.gov...


Theoretical, Logical, and makes a little of sense to me.
I am sorry but I think that I need some more evidence than some of your your tube videos to convince me that the moon is other than explained by the good old reaserchers at Nasa.

I also have a telescope and like to look at the moon.
I am just looking for a little debate with info.

well the moon must be an artificial weapon of some sort against humanity, seeing as I happened to click on video#2 and suffered what I believe to be a mild stroke.

I am coming in to this at a late time, I apologise, but once long ag it was believed that Mars had canals.

Several credible people observerd it and agreed. Definitely canals.

And then optics improved and the canals couldn't be found.

What I think is this: Our brains are designed to look for structure and form in our surroundings. It is one of our survival traits that protected us from naturally camoflaged predators.

Unfortunately much in nature is indistinct, grainy and blurred. Even our atmosphere "bubbles" and "shimmers" objects seen through it.

So our brain then looks for patterns and infers content when none exists.

I have looked at the moon through small and very large telescopes and have seen nothing like you describe but I think I can see (from your video) how you could see them.

You dont make a lick of sense, Your camera sucks and telescope smells bad

Originally posted by AlienCarnage
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

As far as gravity goes; there are many contributing factors for gravity, thus not one simple answer. The planets revolve around a star, that star also rotates as well. The entire solar system revolves as well. These forces have an influence on gravity. The earth’s core also affects the gravity we experience here on our planet.

The moon is moving away from the Earth, which would mean that sometime into the future of this planet, the moon will no longer be there.

I agree and thank you for that explanation.
I still feel (almost, know) that the Moon has nothing to do with anything down here. It is my belief it's not natural.

In the past they (the Elite, the Illuminati, the Occultists whomever 'they' were) wanted the minion (us) to think the Moon was a bad place with bad influences thus the word: lunatic.

It's all a bunch of nonsense and a slew of stories to confuse and control us.

And also, like our Sun (in a binary population) we only have one Moon. Why is that?
We sure seem to be the exception to many Universal norms.

Originally posted by Royal76
I don't believe that the moon is a artificial moon. But that doesn't mean there isn't something on there. It's not like NASA, or the government is reallly all that forth comming about how things look. Plus i thought it weird, that we went there planted a flag, and took a couple other visits and left. Honestly if there wasn't something off, then why isn't there a US base, or station on the moon

Then again maybe there is

Because i'm sure it would be a total shock to everyone here if we found out that the government lied to us about something.

I think you'd enjoy Penetration by Ingo Swann because he goes into all of what you just mentioned.
He's a remote viewer who worked for the government.

I had the book for years and last year I learned it was extremely rare so I sold my $8.95 paperback book for 150.00. plus *30.00 for shipping *eBay trick*

There's GOT to be a reason why so many want that book but let me try to find the eBook.
Here ya go. I really think you'll enjoy it. It's a real quick read too!
Penetration

Originally posted by TedHodgson
reply to post by Slipdig1

 

It defines our night and day, Worded it wrong

edit on 14/2/11 by TedHodgson because: (no reason given)

I've seen the moon during the day and also it has been absent at night.

I don't think it defines it at all... The fact there is no sun at night, and it is there during the day, defines day and night.

Originally posted by TedHodgson
reply to post by VI0811

 

Of course its real!
Who said anything different?!

The OP did, look at the title.. ARTIFICIAL. Uhh, has the dictionary gone and changed on me again?!

reply to post by NorkiSpaceDuck


You've gone and completely flipped out man.

Hope you're tethered to something stable...

Wow, I skimmed, first and last page to be sure the topic didn't reveal anything new. Yeah, HOAX.

No base or anything unnatural. NOTHING artificial. Structures in lo-res? Muah-ha-ha-ha-ha.

I am an amateur astronomer, I have a few scopes and the necessary astro-photography gear. I wouldn't post anything unless it was crystal clear, and verified. I run my own observatory, and have logs, and files, lots of .avi files of celestial objects, and I run registax to complete my images. Stack a 10 second video of the moon, and you get excellent resolution for pics. Hook a cam to your eyepiece and pipe it to your laptop in the field, and you'd be amazed at the resolution. I don't wanna bang the OP, but I call this as I read it.

A few facts, however.

I've tried to find the Apollo landing site. I'm told it's too small to resolve. Research indicates they pointed Hubble at the moon, but Hubble can't resolve images under 5 meters. The lunar lander is 3 meters long.

I say it should be possible to spot the flag and lunar excursion module, and get hi-res pics. I can't find it. A shadow? Perhaps, but really, I am low tech compared to million dollar observatories. I think someone should produce an image on the landing site, equipment left behind, etc.

I do know that I can google earth to a specific resolution, uhm, to see cars in a parking lot, and be able to tell their color. Yeah, I know, there is a difference in the length of resolution from NEO and FEO, but dang it, someone should've figured this out.

Unless, there is nothing really there to find? Search the moon from earth in the 60-70's, and you didn't have decent equipment. Nowadays, however, someone should be able to produce visual artifacts. They can't. Fact.

Blurry resolution is annoying, and a HOAX, I refuse to try to imagine anything. Shame on you. Give us something we can see, pretty please. Focusing should be our priority. Getting CLEAR images is a priority. Upgrade your equipment, what ever it takes, but please don't post blurry speculations.

reply to post by Druid42


Some clarifications, and then a present for you....since you asked:


Firstly,

Yeah, HOAX.

This thread? NO, not really. Just....something else. Certainly not an intentional deception, which defines a hoax.

I am an amateur astronomer...

Then, cutting to the chase, you should know that the optical equipment here on the surface of the Earth is NOT able to resolve objects as small as the Apollo hardware, from the distance of roughly 250,000 miles. Check the science of optics, and you will then see the need for a VERY large mirror, for our reflecting telescope. A mirror bigger than anything in existence. (I forget the dimension, off the top of my head....others have posted).

I say it should be possible to spot the flag and lunar excursion module....

?? You mentioned the dimensions of the LM....it is WAY larger than the flag!! (Flags were 48 inches by 30 inches). So, why do you think it's possible to see something a fraction of the size of the LM? From nearly directly above? Oh, the shadow...yes, good thinking...we're coming to that.....(but not from Earth-based telescopes).

I think someone should produce an image on the landing site, equipment left behind, etc.

Ah....yes, has happened. Hear of LCROSS? The LROC (camera) has some really good shots, to about one-half meter resolution, I believe. But, before we get to that, one more correction of a fallacy belief:

I do know that I can google earth to a specific resolution, uhm, to see cars in a parking lot, and be able to tell their color.

Well....might want to research how Google Earth does that.....they combine the sat images with photos taken by AIRCRAFT...that have flown over, from about 1,000 to 2,000 feet above the surface. Pretty easy, that way, to get some detail, eh??

OK....now, the Apollo 11 landing site, courtesy of the LROC.....enhanced, and oriented to present a montage video:

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by liejunkie01
If the moon is fake, then how did the tides work before the moon? It is my understanding that the tides helped evolution along. What was the tilt of the axis? It is to my understanding that the moon keeps the earth steady instead of wobbling on its axis like Mars. This is why we have the seasons we do.
There are so many real questions that need to be answered that this theory is non exsitant in my opinion.

That's why and how my theory helps answer that. There is absolutely NO proof the Moon affects us.
None. Zip. Nada.
It's been theorized that's all. No one's put a blanket over it to see what would happened to Earth. The closest we get to that possible affect is a Solar eclipse and even that, doesn't stop the tides for a moment.

It is my belief "gravity" emanates from--- thus is a bi-product of----- Earths core.

Then you need to read up on science. If the moon suddenly appeared it would completely change both axis, rotational speed and so on. Even a small change in axis would completely change the climate as well as orientation to stars and none of that has happened. The axial tilt of earth has been stable at 22-24.5~ degrees for hundreds of millions of years if not billions of years.

Originally posted by NorkiSpaceDuck
nice pics

I really hope that's sarcasm.