Mars the anomalies The moon too.

zenonmars · Jul 16, 2007

What do you boys (and gals) think of this? http://www.angelismarriti.it/ANGELISMARRITI-ENG/REPORTS_ARTICLES/Apollo20-InterviewWithWilliamRutledge.htm BTW, if I am not mistaken, Hoagland thinks some of these YouTube vids are hoaxed { "a VERY clever (and expensive?) fake.......a cleverly-disguised "leak"" } Just lookin' for your opinions. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 16, 2007

I think it's crap since the last Apollo mission was 17, and THERE IS NO WAY TO HIDE THE LAUNCH OF A SATURN V and send a mission to the moon without being detected. NONE! Never mind Apollo 18 and 19 before it. MW <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Mee_n_Mac · Jul 16, 2007

Also think about the logistics of making the LV, apparently in secret. Getting all the parts, assembling all the vehicles, testing them and then stacking them. Where did this all happen ? With what personnel and $$s ? And the Russians were along for the ride as well .... tends to strain the credulity factor. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -----------------------------------------------------Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, STOP ! </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Jul 16, 2007

First of all, I think it has very little support and nothing to back up the claims. BTW, are there vids? I couldn't find any. But, let's see.. Launching a Saturn V.. the most powerful launch vehicle ever created... and nobody knows about it? Errm.. that's a little farfetched. You see, for the sake of argument, if I was the "gubberment" or head of some secret Illuminati sect, I'd have just done all this on a normal mission but transmitted taped data gathered, clandestinely, during a previous Moon mission. No need to hide the biggest darn "Look at me!" object we've ever built or cover up the most powerful reaction force (IIRC) ever harnessed to propel a manned object. IMO - It's a pretty unlikely story.. at best. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

TheShadow · Jul 16, 2007

pierround, You have been challenged by MeteorWayne to provide backup for the claim you made regarding a â€œhollow moonâ€. That is his right according to the Uplink Polices & Guidelines, specifically UPG8 Therefore you must either provide credible backup for your claim or retract it. This is not optional. Please read UPG8 and comply with the requirements provided there. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men, the Shadow knows. </div>

JonClarke · Jul 16, 2007

Logging in briefly while in transit..... The reason nothing comparable happens when objects strike the Earth is that it makes much more energy to make the Earth ring than it does the Moon. Large Earthquakes do cause the Earth to ring, sometimes for many months, as happened after the Boxing Day earthquake a few years back. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Jul 16, 2007

JonClarke steps in, reveals truth, then glides silently back out.. Who was that masked man? Yes, JonClarke is Batman. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> PS - Hope your trip is going well. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

pierround · Jul 17, 2007

You know I come in here and it won't let me in so I go away to other things. This I think is the reason. something about that first pages adds. [Make Your Donation Today Help Rebuild Lives & Communities in Hurricane Affected States. www.BushClintonKatrinaFund.org] This stops me and doesn't bring up the list in the main index. And it pisses me off. So I leave. It took me 6 tries to get in. It's like it wants me to go to the link.... I go to the link and come back and it still wonâ€™t let me in? I can go any were else but here. Pierround blows off some steam and walks away and then posts finally.

pierround · Jul 17, 2007

http://www.geocities.com/area51/hollow/8827/moonfacts.html http://www.keelynet.com/unclass/luna.htm Hereâ€™s a whole page of links http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=hollow+moon "The moon has only 60% of the density of Earth. The improbable fact that an equal amount of earth material seemed to weigh almost twice as much as moon matter mystified everyone. Why the difference? The actual answer, some scientists felt, pointed to the possibility that part or all of the moon's interior was hollow!" (4) Then there's a report in the July 1962 issue of Astronautics by Dr. Gordon McDonald, a leading scientist at the Nation Aeronautics and Space Administration in which he states that "according to an analysis of the moon's motion, it appears that the moon is hollow: if the astronomical data are reduced, it is found that the data require that the interior of the moon is less dense than the outer parts. Indeed, it would seem that the moon is more like a hollow than a homogeneous sphere.â€™" (5) In 1959 eminent scientist Professor Iosif Shklovsky put forth his findings in relation to the "moons" circling Mars. "After carefully weighing up the evidence he concludes that they are both hollow" (6) While some "orthodox" scientists will quietly admit that some earthly bodies are probably hollow, they steadfastly refuse to accept the fact that ALL planets and moons are NATURALLY hollow and hurry to add they must be "artificial" satellites. For instance: "The moon seems to be a comparatively light world in contrast with the planet Earth. The fact that the moon is only about 60% as dense as our planet has led scientists to two theories: that the moon is without an iron co

pierround · Jul 17, 2007

Yes they can. During an overcast day you wouldn't be able to tell for sure what was going up trust me.

pierround · Jul 17, 2007

If you take into consideration that maybe the asteroid belt was once a planet that disintegrated, thus killing off the Mars ecosystem or ecology. And that this discovery, http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap070619.html Would make it the eleventh planet I have to wonder if they will discover a twelfth planet? If they do we will have to reconsider the possibility of the Nibiru legends as having some basis in the historical references made by the Sumerians. â€œPlanet Xâ€ return (the ancient Nibiru, adored by the Sumerians in Mesopotamia) Would it then be so far fetched?

JonClarke · Jul 17, 2007

"The moon has only 60% of the density of Earth. The improbable fact that an equal amount of earth material seemed to weigh almost twice as much as moon matter mystified everyone. Why the difference? The actual answer, some scientists felt, pointed to the possibility that part or all of the moon's interior was hollow!" (4) The Earthâ€™s mean density is 5.5, the Moonâ€™s 3.4, 61.8% of Earthâ€™s. This is not a mystery, it is an observation. No scientist with any knowledge of the lunar data would in 1975 (the date of your reference) have sad that this indicated that the Moon was hollow. It can be very easily explained by a somewhat smaller core and less gravitational compression of the matter that makes up the Moon. A density of 3.4 is still denser than most rocks. Furthermore by 1975 there was abundant information on lunar moment of inertia and direct seismic measurements of the lunar interior that showed it had a solid core. Then there's a report in the July 1962 issue of Astronautics by Dr. Gordon McDonald, a leading scientist at the Nation Aeronautics and Space Administration in which he states that "according to an analysis of the moon's motion, it appears that the moon is hollow: if the astronomical data are reduced, it is found that the data require that the interior of the moon is less dense than the outer parts. Indeed, it would seem that the moon is more like a hollow than a homogeneous sphere.â€™" (5) Unfortunately this quote is not to a primary source but to a secondary one. What did Gordon MacDonald actually say as opposed to what he is quoted as saying? In addition, anything said about the Moonâ€™s interior in 1962 was completely superceded by direct measurements from manned and unmanned missions in orbit and on the surface. I think I can find at least one paper by MacDonald at the library tomorrow. However, MacDonaldâ€™s known advocacy of lunar accretion in earth orbit is inconsistent with claiming it was <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · Jul 17, 2007

During an overcast day you wouldn't be able to tell for sure what was going up trust me. Why should we trust you? You have not answered questions, you have dodged issues, you have shown very limited understanding of basic science and technology. An Apollo mission was not something that could be hidden by a cloudy day. It's construction, preparation, launch and conduct required thousands of people. the launch took place from a very public part of the coast and, even on a cloudy day, would have been visible and audible for many tens of km. The spacecraft was detectable in Earth orbit and in transit by amateur and professional satellite trackers. A clandestine Apollo launch was impossible. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · Jul 17, 2007

A week ago I asked the Zen and Pierre to explain the following: Zen - why he still believes Hoagland after such palpable nonsense about 50 km towers that somehow escaped observation for 400 years and can be seen only in dodgy reproductions of a single image from Zond 3. Pierre - why do lunar blocks look like construction material and why lack of data can only be interpreted as editing rather than.... lack of data. Neither participant has answered either question. Instead they have gone off on other topics. This is a violation of the user guide. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

JonClarke · Jul 17, 2007

If you take into consideration that maybe the asteroid belt was once a planet that disintegrated... Olbers proposed this in the early 19th century. However the chemistry of asteroids precludes a single origin. They are the remanants of many dwarf planets that together massed much less than even the Moon. ...killing off the Mars ecosystem or ecology. We don't know whether mars every had an ecology, and if it did whether it was killed off and, if so, by what. If they do we will have to reconsider the possibility of the Nibiru legends as having some basis in the historical references made by the Sumerians. Whatever the legends refer to it would not have been a nonexistant planet. The most likely is that Nibiru is an alternative name for Marduk. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

coolkat · Jul 17, 2007

Aren't most planets and moons hollow to some extent? I mean, they do at least have cavities don't they? I agree that it would take a more massive hit to make the Earth ring, seems only natural really.

JonClarke · Jul 17, 2007

Welcome Coolkat, to SDC! I hope you look round and enjoy our community. There are a few technical problems at the moment, but there are some great discussions here on many topics. To answer your question, yes, all bodies are hollow to some extent, in the sense they have cavities uch as caves. However, hollow earth supporters do not use the word in this sense. They think that the earth (and other planets) are in fact a hollow shell, with a whole new world inside. There is not a shred of evidence for it and it goes against everything we do know about the interior of nthe Earth, Moon, and planets. Hope this helps. Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars Arthur Clarke </div>

zenonmars · Jul 17, 2007

Mee_n_Mac: "So what is it they're refering to when they say "Nothing comparable happens when objects strike Earth." hmm....... You could try asking the guys at the end of the article: "Last modified: Tuesday, 30-Nov-04 11:00:00 AM CDT Author: Jerry Woodfill / NASA, Mail Code ER7, jared.woodfill1@jsc.nasa.gov Curator: Cecilia Breigh, NASA JSC ER Responsible Official: Andre Sylvester, NASA JSC ER7 Automation, Robotics and Simulation Division, Walter W. Guy, Chief." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

mental_avenger · Jul 17, 2007

Jon. The eminent scientist Jules Verne participated in a journey to the center of the Earth. He documented the entire adventure. The Earth is hollow with an entire separate world inside, complete with plants, animals and people. What, do you think he just made up all that? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space. </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 17, 2007

<img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

zenonmars · Jul 17, 2007

Jon: "The reason nothing comparable happens when objects strike the Earth is that it makes much more energy to make the Earth ring than it does the Moon. Large Earthquakes do cause the Earth to ring, sometimes for many months, as happened after the Boxing Day earthquake a few years back." Umm..... I am not following your logic. Obviously, an earthquake is a major energy-releasing event. And "objects" stiking the Earth, usually do so at about 50,000 mph (or whatever the rediculous velocity meteors impact at). If the NASA landing vehicle could elicit this seismic reaction, simply falling back to the lunar surface, Jon, are you suggesting something as simple could do this to the Earth? What size object, simply dropped to Earth, do you believe would be needed for eliciting a similar length of seismic "ring" here on Earth? "You have been challenged to provide backup for the claim you made. That is, evidently, my right according to the Uplink Polices & Guidelines, specifically UPG8 Therefore you must either provide credible backup for your claim or retract it. This is not optional." <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

zenonmars · Jul 17, 2007

Careful, Lost! Shadow is on the patrol! 'That's what irks me about topics like this." Then why post here in Phenomena? It is only about "explaining the unexplained". It is not about obtaining a research grant, and publishing your findings here as though this was a peer-reviewed journal. It is not. "it serves as an example why crackpots like RCH+crew are able to spread their garbage while flooding various topics with links to "mainstream supporting evidence" that are neither supporting of their claims nor serve as evidence" The Shadow knows this: "UPG 4. Thou shalt not post Global Ad Hominems. A Global Ad Hominem is an Ad Hominem comment which is directed at a group that would include Uplink members engaged in the debate." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

zenonmars · Jul 17, 2007

Wayne:"I think it's crap since the last Apollo mission was 17, and THERE IS NO WAY TO HIDE THE LAUNCH OF A SATURN V and send a mission to the moon without being detected. NONE!" I agree. Unless you did it from Australia, and our "enemies" were being censored, and our "allies" were convinced to be silent. That would take some bowling balls, wouldn't it? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

zenonmars · Jul 17, 2007

Jon: "Why should we trust you? You have not answered questions, you have dodged issues, you have shown very limited understanding of basic science and technology." Although his (her?) research may be incomplete, or interpretted as a lay person might interpret it, pierround has indeed shown links to the quoted work of accredited scientists. I am proud of him for even providing his data-links. Jon, please relax. You are taking the fun out of FUNomena. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Again, Jon, this is not an astrophysics debate, SDC is not a peer-reviewed science journal, it is not a "club" for folks with Phd s after their name, and it IS a free service to ALL who are facinated with Space Sciences and the intriguing nuances of this amazing Universe in which we live. Please lighten up, for my fear is that you will make newcomers (visiting SDC for the first time) afraid to share their thoughts and views. We don't want this, do we Jon? Disagree? Fine. Say so. But you are an "insider" and an educator. To tell someone they have "limited understanding of basic science" might make other readers here think you are trying to actuate an agenda to suppress certain notions, ideas, and dreams. Shame on you. Everyone here knows you worked for NASA on some of the Mars missions. Nobody here wants to believe that you are conducting a one-man crusade to quell "creative" thought and discourse. John Kennedy had "limited understanding of basic science and technology". But without him, we would not be chatting here today, would we? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

zenonmars · Jul 17, 2007

Jon: "A week ago I asked the Zen and Pierre to explain the following: Zen - why he still believes Hoagland after such palpable nonsense about 50 km towers that somehow escaped observation for 400 years and can be seen only in dodgy reproductions of a single image from Zond 3. Neither participant has answered either question. Instead they have gone off on other topics. This is a violation of the user guide." Jon, are you blind as well as rude? I certainly DID answer your insulting garbage: (10th post down) Link You know, i am really getting tired of this tactic of yours. This discourse cannot proceed fairly as long as you, Jon, think that by telling untruths and lame accusations, you can circumvent the ideas of your "opponents", chancing that the average SDC reader might not peruse an entire thread. Anything else I can do for you today? Cause I got a lot more "violations" ready for you. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> **edited long URL into a link to prevent it from pushing the post outside the limits of some browsers. Please do not post long URL's. Convert them into short links. The format is [url =http://uplink.space.com/ubbthreads.php] Link [/url] without the space between â€˜urlâ€™ and â€˜=â€™.** Come on folks, this isnâ€™t rocket science. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

Mars the anomalies The moon too.

zenonmars

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Mee_n_Mac

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

TheShadow

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

pierround

Guest

pierround

Guest

pierround

Guest

pierround

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

coolkat

Guest

JonClarke

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

mental_avenger

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page