Farside buildings

[johnlear]

 
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.

Here is the math for the moons gravity at the exact time Apollo was alleged to have landed.



[/<a href="http://img848.imageshack.us/i/moongravitywithsun1.jpg/" target="_blank"><img src="http://img848.imageshack.us/img848/277/moongravitywithsun1.jpg" alt="Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us" border="0"/></a>

http://img848.imageshack.us/img848/277/moongravitywithsun1.jpg

[deuem]

John, Thank you very much for your time and effort. It will take some time to go over this math. I have to shake out a lot of cobwebs first. Deuem

[ArMaP]

The only problem with those calculations is that they are based on the assumption that they were in straight line between the Earth and the Moon.

[Pimander]

The only problem with those calculations is that they are based on the assumption that they were in straight line between the Earth and the Moon.

Who/what do say they assume were in a straight line?  Do you mean the N point?  Or the Sun, Moon and Earth?

[ArMaP]

Who/what do say they assume were in a straight line?  Do you mean the N point?  Or the Sun, Moon and Earth?

I mean the neutral point, as the text says "Subtracting the NM distance, we get the EN distance of 325,364,060.1 m".

Doesn't that mean that they (whoever they were) that they used the distance between the Earth and the Moon in a straight line? For what we know, the angle between the Moon, Apollo 11 and the Earth could have anything, as there is always a neutral point if we have the Earth on one side and the Moon on the other, even if they are not all three in a straight line.

Wouldn't that change all the values?

[johnlear]

Doesn't that mean that they (whoever they were) that they used the distance between the Earth and the Moon in a straight line? For what we know, the angle between the Moon, Apollo 11 and the Earth could have anything, as there is always a neutral point if we have the Earth on one side and the Moon on the other, even if they are not all three in a straight line.

Wouldn't that change all the values?

They?

Pari Spolter was born in Tehran, Iran. She did her undergraduate work at the University of Geneva, Switzerland, and received her Ph.D. in Biochemistry from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Dr. Spolter's numerous research articles have been published in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, Biochemica et Biophisica Acta and other periodicals. She is a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and a member of the American Mathematical Society.

Dr. Spolter wrote and published "The Gravitational Force of the Sun" in 1993 (Orb Publishing, Grenada Hills, CA.)

As Apollo 11 made only one mid course correction of 3 seconds from 16:16:58 to 16:17:01, July  17, 1969, it couldn't have been much of an angle and certainly not enough to have added any appreciable distance.

And change all the values?

Whether or not Apollo 11 flew the course upside down and backwards  the neutral point and gravity of the moon is not going to change.

I think I will invite Dr. Spolter to join us and clear up some of your misconceptions you borrowed from Jim Oberg.

[ArMaP]

I think I will invite Dr. Spolter to join us and clear up some of your misconceptions you borrowed from Jim Oberg.

Mu misconceptions are my own, I don't need to borrow them from someone else.

[deuem]

The only problem with those calculations is that they are based on the assumption that they were in straight line between the Earth and the Moon.

Hi Armap, I really think TLM should move this topic to a new thread and one of the mods can paste the moon gravity posts there, pg 20 to 21, maybe "Math for the moons gravity" We are un-intentionally derailing Johns nice thread on Far side buildings because of another great topic.  I feel sure that Mr. Lear and others would join in again. Deuem

[Sgt.Rocknroll]

Thank you...lolololol

I'm really interested in the Moon and what may or may not be up there. I'm not one to visit too many other topics because they really hold no interest for me. It would be nice to have one place to look at, discuss, analyze moon structures/facilities and such. The main topic is 'Anomalies on the Moon'. Maybe one of the mods can rearrange things to allow for a better experience for fools like me...

If I'm over stepping my bounds please forgive me...

I really love this place...

[johnlear]

Thank you...lolololol

I'm really interested in the Moon and what may or may not be up there. I'm not one to visit too many other topics because they really hold no interest for me. It would be nice to have one place to look at, discuss, analyze moon structures/facilities and such. The main topic is 'Anomalies on the Moon'. Maybe one of the mods can rearrange things to allow for a better experience for fools like me...

If I'm over stepping my bounds please forgive me...

I really love this place...

Rocky, does that mean you are in agreement with Deuem. Whatever you folks want we can get it done today.

To all: when you get a dedicated professional to do the math on the gravity of the moon then its very likely that the equations are correct.

ArMap,

I can't figure out what you have against the moons gravity being .7% that of earths. That would explain all of the hoaxed photos that NAZA has presented us. It would explain Firsofs and Pickerings observations. It would vindicate Hansson and nail Admiral Newcomb to the cross.

Your argument that they flew a curved fight path is straight from Jim Oberg and is total nonsense. And you did get  that from Oberg.

Why can't we allow he truth to seep in? There is a  breathable atmosphere on the moon and there are likely 1.5 to 2.0 billion people up there and that is just on the surface.

Have you got something against moon people? Who do you think lives in all those structures up there? Who do you think is doing all that mining? Have you read Howard Mengers book "From Outer Space" about his trip to the moon? Why was Menger then a special consultant to the Pentagon?

Every planet and moon in our solar system has a civilization on it. There are 40 planets in our solar system. The universe is infinite. Both of Einsteins theories, general and special have been debunked. Newton's law of gravitation has been debunked.

Do you do any reading besides punching a keyboard and watching a screen? You do know that the web is purely a disinformation source?

Come on ArMap. Pull your socks up ,lad.

[1Worldwatcher]

In a sense, the Gravitational variables are of this exact topic, what kind of construction materials that would be required, the  availability of said minerals and building materials, the exact dimension's of supposed and alledged structures, etc. etc.
I too truly enjoy this thread, it allows me to contemplate exactly what is and "Can't" be out there that we do not know about, "Exactly". The one problem that seems to be the thorn of the anomalies research on the moon are that  the PT B's aren't very up front with offering subjectable and untampered with evidences of such feasibility's of there being structures on our closest satellite planetoids.
If we had access too such viable and potentially earth shattering untouched photo's, or could venture the travel our selves to the surface of the Moon, we would be square in the middle of finding the absolutes of these events being nothing short of miraculous finds.
We are doing this to farther our understanding of the Moon and it's veritable inconclusive anomalies. We search by means of provided for materials and with John coming up with the photo's he has thus far, we get a peek into the realm of theunderstanding of why this topic is so vital to the posterity of our own Human existence and the possible indoctrination of there being 'Others' that have been doing what we are doing currently by way of natural resources and expanding our uses of such by having to travel too distant places too retain such vital natural resources.
I have been following John, Zorgon, Mayatayas and other s over this topic for some years now,  some of theinfo too me is mundane at moment's, then there is a light that flickers and "BAM!" I see the importance of the mentioned article of discussion.
With John's insight of these anomalies and his affiliation, one can't just write these incidental structures off as sheer light anomalies or reflective anomalies cast by the Suns rays, it is more complexed and requires critical analogy.
I for one, believe there is something there, and we are looking at too many thing's that resemble what we are looking for that it becomes obvious, "They don't want us too know of these thing's" per Se.
As I would like to contribute more to the pictured area of these anomalies, I am limited by understanding of what is available. I can only access what has been brought to the table for discussion thus far, but there is "Something" too all of it. We are just waiting for the incontrovertible evidence that one needs to directly assimilate these finding's into the public eye as a "Fact" based (No pun intended) scenario that was intentionally avoided to be made public.
With all that has been brought forth, it is hard too not see the importance of these events having taken place for our consumption and deduction's of the matter at hand.
We can all agree that something is there on the moon's surface, and itlooks as if it is remnants or existing structures, adn I am all game for that proposal of the indifferent and out of the box thinking of what has been looked at this far.

1Worldwatcher

[undo11]

and "Can't" be out there

i don't think there's such a thing as "can't be" in this example.  everytime i think, oh that's right, there's no oxygen there, or there's no atmosphere there. or it rains sulfuric acid there or methane lol, somebody proves that some lifeforms have already been shown to exist in not only extreme environments, but completely hostile environments, under the most unlikely conditions. 

did you by chance follow john's moon thread on ats?

[Sgt.Rocknroll]

Rocky, does that mean you are in agreement with Deuem. Whatever you folks want we can get it done today.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the term 'Moon Anomalies'. I was thinking it was the actual buildings/mining ops/towers and otherwise physical items. Maybe 'Moon Anomalies' means all things understood/misunderstood about the Moon.

I'm fine with the way things as they are. But if someone would like to or think it would be better to categorize topics on specific items of interest, I'm down with that too.

I'll say it over and over and over....I LOVE THIS PLACE....
Peace.

[Pimander]

I'm fine with the way things as they are. But if someone would like to or think it would be better to categorize topics on specific items of interest, I'm down with that too.

This was one of two threads I was intending to tidy up and move certain posts.  However, I won't touch it at the moment as there is too much going on and I don't want to confuse.  It will run as it is for now.

[1Worldwatcher]

i don't think there's such a thing as "can't be" in this example.  everytime i think, oh that's right, there's no oxygen there, or there's no atmosphere there. or it rains sulfuric acid there or methane lol, somebody proves that some lifeforms have already been shown to exist in not only extreme environments, but completely hostile environments, under the most unlikely conditions. 

did you by chance follow john's moon thread on ats?

"Can't be" and "Exactly" are sarcasims towards the PT B's Undo11. FYI