Farside buildings

[deuem]

CORRECTION:  I, JohnLear, do not believe that any Apollo mission happened. Especially Apollo 20 with the fake spaceship near Tsiolkovsky.

I would like to ask a question, but first I would like to make a statement so you know what I think also.

I feel very comfortable in saying that indeed the Saturn 5 rockets blasted of from the cape. Millions saw this happen. Once that ship gets out of eye sight anything can happen and we are now left to the PTB to inform us. At that time back in the 60ties a lot of eyes were on this event including Russia and China. So every inch past loss of sight was being tracked by others. One can even question if anyone was inside.  So faith tells me what I think and what should be possible. Technically I see no reason why they could not have made the trip to the moon, stayed there for a few days and then came home, Even no problem with the LM doing its pull out and turn around. Rather they actually went to the surface, I can not prove 100%. This is something one either believes or shrugs off.

So my question would be, if you do not believe that any Apollo mission happened, is there any position along the way you would agree with or did they send up an empty Saturn 5 and drop the Apollo re-entry ship from high altitude for splash down.

Thank you,
Deuem

[1Worldwatcher]

CORRECTION:  I, JohnLear, do not believe that any Apollo mission happened. Especially Apollo 20 with the fake spaceship near Tsiolkovsky.

Sorry John, didn't realize that I said "That it did happen" meant "that it didn't happen"
Please accept my appologies and I will cut that out right now sir. Fixing the problem righ tnow......Sorry guy's, my bad.

1Worldwatcher

[1Worldwatcher]

Here are a few more Sgt. of the Apollo missions. Pay very close attention to the anomoly located at the upper left hand of the shot, don't know what it is, but it seems too be a physical object. (This pertains to the first picture posted.)

APOLLO201520AS2015-91-124031


APOLLO201520AS2015-88-119831



APOLLO201520AS2015-88-119801


Very clear photo's, the Apollo 20 mission is highly debated, but Zorgon and Mr. Lear and I have pretty much concluded that the mission didn't happen.
Thanks for all the great insight and excellent rendering's Sgt.  hope to hear from or about these photo's soon, very detailed, just not the 1200-1500dpi I was hoping for...lol

1Worldwatcher

[ArMaP]

This next one is of a supposed "Star City" it does not have the actual lunar location associated with it, but I am sure John has ran across it a few times.

I was looking through this thread when I saw this, so I don't know if anyone already posted it.

There's no lunar location associated with it because it's on Mars, as you can see here.

[ArMaP]

Are those supposed to be from Apollo 20? They are all Apollo 15 photos.

Or did I miss something.

[1Worldwatcher]

Are those supposed to be from Apollo 20? They are all Apollo 15 photos.
Or did I miss something.

I am sorry ArMap, I had a PC crash sometime ago and lost info on the pics, they were saved to photobucket account, but that is all the info I have, I think my folders were corrupted somehow, this could be on Mars, or Mercury photos, I am not sure, being's we don't have a 'Modify' button on this thread, I couldn't remove it. Sorry guy's, PC is running good now, got everything fixed, except these definite mistakes I seem to have acquired via my info and pics that I had posted.

You were right to question ArMap, and yes, may be Mars, or Mercury, not sure. Intersting pic though. Sorry for the confusion guy's.
As you can see , I haven't poste danything for a while, I am unsure of anything I have, with no topography locations, my posts would be moot and confusing.
1Worldwatcher

[johnlear]

I would like to ask a question, but first I would like to make a statement so you know what I think also.

I feel very comfortable in saying that indeed the Saturn 5 rockets blasted of from the cape. Millions saw this happen. Once that ship gets out of eye sight anything can happen and we are now left to the PTB to inform us..

Thank you,
Deuem

Hello Deuem,

It may have looked like a Saturn 5. But it wasn't. They never got the Saturn 5 to work properly. So what they did is disguise what they could get to work as a Saturn 5. To check this out you can look at any of the films of the takeoff and you will see that a second stage never fires. They always clip the film just before when the 2nd stage had fired they could have shown it. This is confirmed by a Russian scientest who searched all films for a second stage firing.

Its the same hoax as 911 where alleged planes were seen 'by thousands' crashing into the WTC. Out of the 53 videos there were several different angles which showed 5 or 6 different trajectories. It was video fakery or video fakery combined with holograms.

No Apollo mission went to the moon mainly because the gravity whichh is .7 of Earths gravity. That is proven by the Newton/Bulialdus Law of Inverse Square which, even using the sun as a third body, equates the moon gravity at .68% at the exact time the alleged Apollo 11 would have landed on June 20, 1969.

The Russian scientest says he has good evidence that rocket landed in the Indian ocean and was recovered by the Russians.

Not to mention the fact that once inside the lunar lander they allegedly opened the door to throw their boots out to save weight. They would, of course, lost all pressurization and suffocated.

Nope. No landing.

[ArMaP]

Not to mention the fact that once inside the lunar lander they allegedly opened the door to throw their boots out to save weight.

Is that a fact or just alleged?

I know I never heard of it before.

[deuem]

Hello Deuem,

It may have looked like a Saturn 5. But it wasn't. They never got the Saturn 5 to work properly. So what they did is disguise what they could get to work as a Saturn 5. To check this out you can look at any of the films of the takeoff and you will see that a second stage never fires. They always clip the film just before when the 2nd stage had fired they could have shown it. This is confirmed by a Russian scientest who searched all films for a second stage firing.

Its the same hoax as 911 where alleged planes were seen 'by thousands' crashing into the WTC. Out of the 53 videos there were several different angles which showed 5 or 6 different trajectories. It was video fakery or video fakery combined with holograms.

No Apollo mission went to the moon mainly because the gravity whichh is .7 of Earths gravity. That is proven by the Newton/Bulialdus Law of Inverse Square which, even using the sun as a third body, equates the moon gravity at .68% at the exact time the alleged Apollo 11 would have landed on June 20, 1969.

The Russian scientest says he has good evidence that rocket landed in the Indian ocean and was recovered by the Russians.

Not to mention the fact that once inside the lunar lander they allegedly opened the door to throw their boots out to save weight. They would, of course, lost all pressurization and suffocated.

Nope. No landing.

Thank you for the response. I will have to go back and view the lift offs where possible. I have never looked into this.  I know a lot of people had a problem with the center engine. Too much yellow flame, said to be from Kerosene burning.

If I follow what you wrote, would you then say that every Apollo Command module orbit shot of the moon is what? Are they from other missions, unmanned or just plain out right forged?

John, can you please go a little deeper on the gravity. The difference should change all flight plans, orbit distance, return command module engines and the LEM engines any thing else. For now can we pass on the landed moon photos and film and keep the discussion in space. It one doesn't work, the other doesn't work either. Is that OK?

I had never heard about the boots either, that's a funny story. That would be almost instant death.

I also do Cad math work but different than Sarge. I go after the tech side. How do things match up? One photo vs another. Size, shape and objects out of place. As I see something I will try it. Until then I would like to get used to this great site Zorgon has going.

Thanks, Deuem

[Pimander]

John, can you please go a little deeper on the gravity.

Yes, I know I'm not John.... 

There is already some information on the forum regarding this.

Another puzzle in the mystery of the Moon is the so-called "neutral point". The neutral point is that point in space, between the earth and the moon where the pull of the earth's gravity is exactly equal to the gravity of the earth is equal pull of the moon's gravity, hence 'neutral point'. Mainstream science, up until a few years ago maintained that the neutral point was 24,000 miles from the moon and that, according to the Bullialdus/Newton law of inverse square which states:

• "Any physical quantity or strength is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them, specifically, the gravitational attraction between two massive objects, in additional to being directly proportional to the product of their masses, is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them."

The gravity on the moon would be one sixth that of earths.But there are a few problems with that 24,000 miles figure.

• "At a point 43,495 miles from the Moon, lunar gravity exerted a force equal to the gravity of the Earth, then some 200,000 miles distant." - Wernher von Braun (Time Magazine, July 25, 1969.)

This is Eugene Cernan's book "The Last Man On The Moon" written with Don Davis. Copyright 1999 Eugene Cernan and Don Davis. St. Martin's Griffin, New York. ISBN 0-312-19906-6 (hc) ISBN 0-312-26351-1 (pbk) LOCC TL789.8.U6A52435 1999 629.45"0092-dc21{b}:

(Inbound to the Moon) "It was Saturday December 9 and we were in the moons firm hold only about 38,000 miles out and drawing closer by the moment."

This is Michael Collins' book, "Carrying the Fire An Astronaut's Journeys" Copyright 1974 by Michael Collins. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York LOCCC TL789.85.C64A33 629.4'092'4 {B} 74-7211:

(Outbound from the Moon) "Houston reports the instant at which we leave the lunar sphere of influence. This means that despite the fact we are only 34,000 nautical miles (39,000 statue miles) from the moon and still 174,000 miles from earth, the earth's pull has become dominant, and the mathematical equations now recognize that fact."

Reginald Turnhill "The Moonlandings" Copyright Reginald Turnhill 2003. Cambridge University Press ISBN 0521815959.

(Inbound to the Moon)"Soon after that a new stage in manned spaceflight was reached. Like a ball thrown upwards, the spacecraft had been gradually slowing down, until its velocity was 2724 mph and its position was 202,825 miles from Earth, and 38,900 miles from the Moon. For the first time, men had reached a point where the pull of Earth's gravity was less than that of another body. Now the pull of lunar gravity was greater and the craft's speed began to increase again as it fell towards the moon." Reginald Turnhill "The Moonlandings" Copyright Reginald Turnhill 2003.

No matter how many flip flopping, flap jacking Earth Moon sun 'spheres of influence' paradigm shifting 'non-rotating (or rotating) frames of reference' you throw into the mix the fact is at some point the Apollo spacecraft left the dominant pull of earths gravity and was in the dominant pull of the moon's gravity or left the dominant pull of the moon's gravity and was in the dominant pull of the earth's gravity. That point is the neutral point and that point is approximately 43,495 miles.

And that point using the Bullialdus/Newton law of inverse square to calculate the 'relative' pull of the earth to the relative pull of the moon is, using earth as '1' is .64 for the moon.

That means that the relative gravity on the moon is .64 of earth's gravity. That is approximately 2/3 of earth's gravity. Now you can talk, sing, dance, play pinochle, play charades, stand on your head, spout nonsense like:

all you want but the moons gravity is at least 64% of earth's gravity.

Von Braun gave us 43,495 miles; Collins gives us "firm hold only about 38,000 miles out"; Cernan gives us "39,000 miles from the moon out"; Turnhill gives us "38,900 miles from the moon". Now it can't get much clearer than that. Let's look at the possibility, however far fetched it may seem and suppose that some incredibly advanced civilization wanted to monitor earth and its start up mankind, the dawn of civilization on Earth.

Continued...

SOURCE: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/forum/index.php?topic=64.msg687#msg687

Sorry to jump in there John but there is no need to repeat ourselves.

[ArMaP]

So, what's the distance between Earth and the Moon?

All of those distances from Earth to some point and from that point to the Moon result in different totals.

The distance between three objects can change a lot, while the distance between two of those remains constant.

[deuem]

I checked as many of the Apollo Saturn 5 launch videos I could and almost all of them cut out right before the second stage fired. I was able to find one that might show it. It is called "As You Remember It: The Lift-Off of APOLLO 11"  I found it on Youtube. The link is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGNryrsT7OI

When watching it you will notice at 8min 32sec there is an edit frame to the ground and spectators. So the continuity is lost. When it returns to the separation staging it is very difficult to see if it is the same exact rocket. I would have liked to see this uninterrupted if possible. It leaves me wondering if that was done on purpose or they changes video feeds. If someone could locate the master footage of this film without the insert it should be worth talking about.

I made a simple gif of the insert and a few frames of the separation afterwards. Is the video a slight of hand switch to some other 2 or 3 stage rockets or the real thing?



*****************

On the L-1 point and gravity issue. In the above post added by Pimander from zorgon, there are a lot of starting points from the Moon out and the Earth in. None of them add up to the same number in distance. I can find difference of as much as 39,000 miles. What distance was used to calculate the 0.64 for the moon?
 
I did some Cad set up work like I would start to draw up a new project. I used Earth @ 7,926 miles dia. Moon @ 2,160 miles dia. and a distance of 250,000 miles center to center. If I was going to fly a figure 8 around them I would calculate the cross point by using the Moon/Earth tangents against where they cross the straight line to each other. That point worked out to 53,540 miles. If one took a string around the earth to the moon in a figure 8, that would be where the string crosses.  What would the inversion square number be there? Even higher I would think....

Using the same tech, Earth to the Sun was 844,404 miles. Is that the Earth Sun point?

If none of this is worth while, sorry for wasting your time....

Deuem

[Sgt.Rocknroll]

Ok back to 'Farside Buildings'...This is my last look at V13H...Time to move on with other things...
There are so many interesting items to look at on this photo, but nothing that says 'hey yeah there it is'...
I think the 'arch' in the middle was really interesting and I think there were a lot of things going on around there...

Once again, All Thanks to John.....
Peace 

[1Worldwatcher]

There is a lot of things to digest with this area Sgt.. I don't know how you can stay on it with such constitution without being a bit overwhelmed!! LOL
There was one thing that I caught, seems as if you were pointing this out as well with your cursor, might have been just passing over it with the cursor, bu tit seems as if you paused there for a moment.



Ther rectangular object does seem to be a lighted area, it could be an out cropping of stone, but the shadow does not really show well for this assumption.

As you post your video finds and assesment Sgt. , "Is it possible too get your interpretations of what you are seeing first hand and why you find these particualr places of higher interests?" Know you have a lot of research a head of you, but to have your vocal input would help to understand everything you are finding that is of interest.

Thought I had stopped the video in freeze at the proper time, but the time thing didn't work, it is at the 1:16 time line of your video, it is the retangular 'Lighted' area in the center right of the screen. very intrigueing. You put your cusor right on top of it.

Great work as Usual Sgt., very nicely done.

1Worldwatcher

[Sgt.Rocknroll]

Thanks for the comments 1WW... your observation about me explaining what I'm seeing and why I find it interesting is noted... Sometimes I do and sometimes I don't...(mainly when I play it back I sound very, well, weird.)..

Most of V13H are just interesting formations, that may or may not be of intelligent design.
What really jumps out at me are rectangular shapes, one on top of another. Curved items such as the one you pointed out on top of the rectangle. If I see something that appears to be circular in nature, I zoom in on it and look at the pixels to see the different shades of gray. If they end abruptly with no fading to it, I conclude that it's not a physical shape..(don't know if I'm explaining myself very well)..

I'm always interested in what I call these flat plateaus that appear to be shaved off in the middle of some very rocky formations. They appear out of the blue and they usually have one or more interesting angular formations on top. I'm no expert, but I don't think there's much liquid or wind erosion on the moon...

I also look for what I call ramps, that seem to  connect one area to another. They're continuous and can and usually do run down to another plateau.

I also look for the typical spaceship, flying saucer, and the usual moon man taking his daily stroll...other than that. that's about it.

Anyway I'll try to be more descriptive in the next video...

Peace