The Case for the Civilization On The Moon
Moderator: Super Moderators
Hi, I'm new.
I've been reading this stuff and on YouTube listening to interviews and this is all very mind-blowing and new. I haven't quite heard this stuff ever put this way before; I'm simply dumbfounded.
But as I've read/listened, Lear states that the skies of the Earth, Mars, and Moon are all blue. But here there is now mention that it's saffron yellow.
So which is it? Why the inconsistency of proclamation?
As well, if the Moon's surface is so colorful and airy, why is it a dead looking grey rock from Earth? It looks dead and grey to the eye, and through a telescope. And it's not very far away.
Also, how or why does only the "far side" have all of the creatures, rivers, Gardens of Eden, but the "Front" is grey and dead looking?
I'm open-minded and curious, but I'm also skeptical. Of course I am; the claims about the Moon, Venus, other worlds with civilizations is more bizarre than I've ever heard.
I "want to" believe in it because it's totally outrageous and wild. But my mind has a difficult time accepting it particularly when with the naked eye Mars and Moon are simply dead looking worlds.
I've been reading this stuff and on YouTube listening to interviews and this is all very mind-blowing and new. I haven't quite heard this stuff ever put this way before; I'm simply dumbfounded.
But as I've read/listened, Lear states that the skies of the Earth, Mars, and Moon are all blue. But here there is now mention that it's saffron yellow.
So which is it? Why the inconsistency of proclamation?
As well, if the Moon's surface is so colorful and airy, why is it a dead looking grey rock from Earth? It looks dead and grey to the eye, and through a telescope. And it's not very far away.
Also, how or why does only the "far side" have all of the creatures, rivers, Gardens of Eden, but the "Front" is grey and dead looking?
I'm open-minded and curious, but I'm also skeptical. Of course I am; the claims about the Moon, Venus, other worlds with civilizations is more bizarre than I've ever heard.
I "want to" believe in it because it's totally outrageous and wild. But my mind has a difficult time accepting it particularly when with the naked eye Mars and Moon are simply dead looking worlds.
Also, if the Moon has a blue atmosphere, why wasn't it seen in any of the footage from orbit? You would have seen at least a tenuous veil of blue on the horizon but no such view is to be seen. I assume they totally "sanitized" the motion picture film, too?
I'm just not seeing how the sky is blue/yellow on the Moon when no evidence of an atmosphere exists when personally viewing the surface. And when it is claimed that clouds exist on the far side .... they don't migrate to the forward side .... not ever?
I'm just not seeing how the sky is blue/yellow on the Moon when no evidence of an atmosphere exists when personally viewing the surface. And when it is claimed that clouds exist on the far side .... they don't migrate to the forward side .... not ever?
Hiya Bonzelite,
Welcome to the forum, these moon theories are fascinating huh? I to want to believe, but it is difficult, so trying to keep an open mind and can't wait to hear from John Lear again
Welcome to the forum, these moon theories are fascinating huh? I to want to believe, but it is difficult, so trying to keep an open mind and can't wait to hear from John Lear again
"You'll get used to my babbling, all the others have." - Anna Madrigal from "Tales Of The City" by Armistead Maupin
thank you for the invite.....
yes, I take it John isn't visiting here anymore or he's rarely checking in.
I do indeed "want to" believe many of these amazing allegations. But even as an amateur astronomer I simply cannot see how the Moon, as near as it is, and through the eyepiece particularly, is this colourful wonderland of abundant lifeforms and atmospheres.
I'd like to hear the explanation for that. In my summation, even a tenuous atmosphere would present itself. But no such visual cues seem to exist, save for occasional yellowish tinting of the Moon, with reports of a haze being visible on occasion. If this is indeed the atmosphere, then I can begin to buy the theory a bit more.
Are "they" downplaying the role and significance of the yellow/sulfurous appearances and hazes? Are these events actually perpetual and global?
But that leaves the issue of the alleged "clouds" and "rivers" and "animals" on the "far side." I find that very difficult to accept.
But then again, I'm on this forum and my mind is open.
yes, I take it John isn't visiting here anymore or he's rarely checking in.
I do indeed "want to" believe many of these amazing allegations. But even as an amateur astronomer I simply cannot see how the Moon, as near as it is, and through the eyepiece particularly, is this colourful wonderland of abundant lifeforms and atmospheres.
I'd like to hear the explanation for that. In my summation, even a tenuous atmosphere would present itself. But no such visual cues seem to exist, save for occasional yellowish tinting of the Moon, with reports of a haze being visible on occasion. If this is indeed the atmosphere, then I can begin to buy the theory a bit more.
Are "they" downplaying the role and significance of the yellow/sulfurous appearances and hazes? Are these events actually perpetual and global?
But that leaves the issue of the alleged "clouds" and "rivers" and "animals" on the "far side." I find that very difficult to accept.
But then again, I'm on this forum and my mind is open.
I originally thought the sky was blue on the moon but after talking with Howard Menger who was there in 1954 I now believe it is saffron colored.bonzelite wrote: Hi, I'm new.
I've been reading this stuff and on YouTube listening to interviews and this is all very mind-blowing and new. I haven't quite heard this stuff ever put this way before; I'm simply dumbfounded.
But as I've read/listened, Lear states that the skies of the Earth, Mars, and Moon are all blue. But here there is now mention that it's saffron yellow.
So which is it? Why the inconsistency of proclamation?
I took this NASA photo of Copernicus and put the exact color that Howard said it was. I sent a number of varous colored swatches to Howard in Vero Beach Florida and he picked this color. Howard is 86 years old.
As well, if the Moon's surface is so colorful and airy, why is it a dead looking grey rock from Earth? It looks dead and grey to the eye, and through a telescope. And it's not very far away.
The moon was designed to look dead and grey from earth. We are not supposed to know about the people that live there. I do not know exactly why that is a secret.
They are not creatures. They are people just like us. The only difference is that they don't wake up in the morning looking for Muslims to kill.Also, how or why does only the "far side" have all of the creatures, rivers, Gardens of Eden, but the "Front" is grey and dead looking?
The far side is where these people work and live. It beautiful and interesting.
The 'truth' being hidden from you is more bizarre than you could possible imagine.I'm open-minded and curious, but I'm also skeptical. Of course I am; the claims about the Moon, Venus, other worlds with civilizations is more bizarre than I've ever heard.
I "want to" believe in it because it's totally outrageous and wild. But my mind has a difficult time accepting it particularly when with the naked eye Mars and Moon are simply dead looking worlds.
Here is a photo taken by Lunar Orbiter in 1966. It is of the near side about 160 miles to the northeast of the Crater Copernicus. See anything unusual?
The lie is different at every level. (RCH)
Including his. (JOL)
Including his. (JOL)
The atmosphere on the moon, while breathable is too thin to see from orbit or from earth. The moon's atmosphere is equal to about 18,000 feet on earth. When earth people visit the moon or go there to work and live they go through a conditioning similar to climbing a high mountain like Mt. Everest. The conditioning used to take about a week. It may be less now.bonzelite wrote: Also, if the Moon has a blue atmosphere, why wasn't it seen in any of the footage from orbit? You would have seen at least a tenuous veil of blue on the horizon but no such view is to be seen. I assume they totally "sanitized" the motion picture film, too?
Yes, there are several photo of clouds and fog on the near side. As to the evidence of an atmosphere here is a photo of King Crater on the far side. You can see the foliage growing up the side of the crater:I'm just not seeing how the sky is blue/yellow on the Moon when no evidence of an atmosphere exists when personally viewing the surface. And when it is claimed that clouds exist on the far side .... they don't migrate to the forward side .... not ever?
The lie is different at every level. (RCH)
Including his. (JOL)
Including his. (JOL)
I'll check in more often.bonzelite wrote: thank you for the invite.....
yes, I take it John isn't visiting here anymore or he's rarely checking in.
I do indeed "want to" believe many of these amazing allegations. But even as an amateur astronomer I simply cannot see how the Moon, as near as it is, and through the eyepiece particularly, is this colourful wonderland of abundant lifeforms and atmospheres.
I'd like to hear the explanation for that. In my summation, even a tenuous atmosphere would present itself. But no such visual cues seem to exist, save for occasional yellowish tinting of the Moon, with reports of a haze being visible on occasion. If this is indeed the atmosphere, then I can begin to buy the theory a bit more.
Are "they" downplaying the role and significance of the yellow/sulfurous appearances and hazes? Are these events actually perpetual and global?
But that leaves the issue of the alleged "clouds" and "rivers" and "animals" on the "far side." I find that very difficult to accept.
But then again, I'm on this forum and my mind is open.
We have some gorgeous color photographs of the moon on our website: thelivingmoon.com.
Here is a photo of Aristarchus that we took. The blue glow indicates the Cerenkov effect or when radiation comes in contact with molecules of air. We suspect that Aristarchus is a gigantic nuclear reactor. The diameter of the dome you see is about 29 miles:
The lie is different at every level. (RCH)
Including his. (JOL)
Including his. (JOL)
Here is a Lunar Orbiter photo of the nearside just to the east of Grimaldi at Damoiseau. The marks in the sky are either reseau marks or developing errors:
The unusual markings in the lower center right are also developing or printing errors.
The unusual markings in the lower center right are also developing or printing errors.
The lie is different at every level. (RCH)
Including his. (JOL)
Including his. (JOL)
-
- Pirate
- Posts: 45448
- Joined: 03-06-2003 03:00 AM
Shirleypal wrote: Hi John, the photo of Aristarchus is absolutely amazing, thanks for posting it......nice to see you btw.
Hello Shirleypal,
On any NASA photo you will see that Aristarchus is always whited out. NASA says they don't know what makes it so white.
Last year we found a photographer in the UK who took some closeups for us and that is where this photo came from.
We displayed the photo at the San Jose UFO conference and a man who identified himself as a nuclear physicist from Lawrence Livermore Labs asked us where we got the photo. We told him and he said, "That is some sort of nuclear reactor." He then explained how the Cerenkov effect worked. As he walked away he was scratching his head and he made the comment, "There appears to be something going on I know nothing about."
We all fell down loao.
The lie is different at every level. (RCH)
Including his. (JOL)
Including his. (JOL)
On another forum, in a thread dedicated to figuring out why we stopped going to the moon in December of 1972, I suggested --- quite tentatively --- that it might have been because somebody met us there when we first landed and told us to scram!
I was told that I was insane for even considering the possibility... You folks don't realize what reality is like outside of The Fantastic Forum, where topics like this one can be discussed in an atmosphere that is free of ridicule. I'm serious about this point, folks. Hot news flash, folks: most people do not have the slightest idea what Coast-to-Coast or Art Bell are! Hard to believe, but true!...
Of course, when the Chinese go to the moon, I wonder how they are going to be able to explain away the fireworks when the Chinese bump into the current owners of the moon --- and refuse to scram, like the Amerikans! But I am sure that some cover story will be cooked up to explain the battle. Hey, they may have done it, once before, for Dulce, NM, in 1979, you know...
We will see soon enough. We will see...
I was told that I was insane for even considering the possibility... You folks don't realize what reality is like outside of The Fantastic Forum, where topics like this one can be discussed in an atmosphere that is free of ridicule. I'm serious about this point, folks. Hot news flash, folks: most people do not have the slightest idea what Coast-to-Coast or Art Bell are! Hard to believe, but true!...
Of course, when the Chinese go to the moon, I wonder how they are going to be able to explain away the fireworks when the Chinese bump into the current owners of the moon --- and refuse to scram, like the Amerikans! But I am sure that some cover story will be cooked up to explain the battle. Hey, they may have done it, once before, for Dulce, NM, in 1979, you know...
We will see soon enough. We will see...
"Fuggedah about it, Jake --- it's Chinatown!"
joequinn wrote: On another forum, in a thread dedicated to figuring out why we stopped going to the moon in December of 1972, I suggested --- quite tentatively --- that it might have been because somebody met us there when we first landed and told us to scram!
I was told that I was insane for even considering the possibility... You folks don't realize what reality is like outside of The Fantastic Forum, where topics like this one can be discussed in an atmosphere that is free of ridicule. I'm serious about this point, folks. Hot news flash, folks: most people do not have the slightest idea what Coast-to-Coast or Art Bell are! Hard to believe, but true!...
Of course, when the Chinese go to the moon, I wonder how they are going to be able to explain away the fireworks when the Chinese bump into the current owners of the moon --- and refuse to scram, like the Amerikans! But I am sure that some cover story will be cooked up to explain the battle. Hey, they may have done it, once before, for Dulce, NM, in 1979, you know...
We will see soon enough. We will see...
Hi Joe,
and thanks for the post.
In my humble opinion no Apollo mission ever landed on the moon. No Apollo mission ever orbited the moon. It was all a very cleverly orchestrated hoax.
The lie is different at every level. (RCH)
Including his. (JOL)
Including his. (JOL)
thank you John Lear for replying back.
This stuff is just crazy. As stated, I have an open mind to this. My mind doesn't quite want to give permission to fully believe it because it is so beyond anything I've ever imagined possible; the revelation of a breathable atmosphere being entirely insane .... but... I suppose... only if adherence to traditional thinking prevails.
If the atmospheric pressure on the moon is "only" that of base camp on Mt. Everest, ie, approximately 18,000 ft elevation, then liquid water could easily stand on the surface. Same with Mars.
What I don't fully understand, then, is if humanity is "actually" or "really" at a level of technological advancement purported by your teachings, then why in hell are we being restrained from it?
Why is the Earth's inhabitants, en masse, kept stunted, ignorant, and sheltered from the benefits of extreme advancement of culture and consciousness?
The allegations that "we cannot handle it" are, in my summation, complete bullsh#T. I think our humanity absolutely can handle it. The minority of the powerful and elite vastly undermine the intelligence of humanity to elevate itself to another level, with these very elitist and evil agencies keeping humankind artificially held back.
I find that unconscionable and evil and beyond the pale of injustice and tyranny, as if our race and it's condition is being perpetually held for ransom.
This stuff is just crazy. As stated, I have an open mind to this. My mind doesn't quite want to give permission to fully believe it because it is so beyond anything I've ever imagined possible; the revelation of a breathable atmosphere being entirely insane .... but... I suppose... only if adherence to traditional thinking prevails.
If the atmospheric pressure on the moon is "only" that of base camp on Mt. Everest, ie, approximately 18,000 ft elevation, then liquid water could easily stand on the surface. Same with Mars.
What I don't fully understand, then, is if humanity is "actually" or "really" at a level of technological advancement purported by your teachings, then why in hell are we being restrained from it?
Why is the Earth's inhabitants, en masse, kept stunted, ignorant, and sheltered from the benefits of extreme advancement of culture and consciousness?
The allegations that "we cannot handle it" are, in my summation, complete bullsh#T. I think our humanity absolutely can handle it. The minority of the powerful and elite vastly undermine the intelligence of humanity to elevate itself to another level, with these very elitist and evil agencies keeping humankind artificially held back.
I find that unconscionable and evil and beyond the pale of injustice and tyranny, as if our race and it's condition is being perpetually held for ransom.