Show suggestion: Moon anamoly roundtable?

[Will Penguin]

It is the 'paracast'.

There is no such thing as ghosts or aliens or djinn, but they talk about that.

Hey look, it's Omniscient Guy. You knew you'd show up, didn't you?

 

[Anaximander]

Hey look, it's Omniscient Guy. You knew you'd show up, didn't you?

It is the Gypsy curse.

Anyhow, I'm incredibly open-minded about this paranormal stuff. I even provide material for the field instead of shitting all over everyone else's work all the time, like most self-proclaimed 'skeptics'.

 

[boomerang]

Picking out the finest features through a telescope when viewing any planet is a practiced art form. Except on the rarest of nights, the atmosphere wreaks havoc with the image, making faint details warp and snap in and out of focus. So some of the "best stuff" is often glimpsed for a few seconds or less after the observer has spent hours at the eyepiece.

Point is-- experienced planetary observers are usually not fooled. Yes, I am aware of the canals-on-Mars snafu. On the other hand, dark spokes in Saturn's rings have been reported for at least 60 years and were considered artifact, until they were verified photographically by a JPL probe.

So I take historical reports of LTPs very seriously. IMO, the lunar round table idea is a winner. I will also weigh in with Ron in hopes the "moon hoax" stuff is kicked to the curb and left there.

 

[trainedobserver]

Does anyone have a PDF copy of the 1976 book Somebody else is on the moon. by George H. Leonard? If not, does someone have a hard copy they would be willing to loan so that a PDF could be made?

---------- Post added at 08:01 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:51 AM ----------

A similar request for a PDF copy of 1981, We Discovered Alien Bases on the Moon by Fred Steckling or a loaner of a hard copy so that a PDF can be generated.

---------- Post added at 09:43 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:01 AM ----------

In re-listening to the Vito S. Dark Matters shows I got curious about the Lunar and Planetary Institute and looked up their website. Tons of stuff there.

 

[owlman]

Yes, let's please not even go there with a " did we land on the moon' debate. This new show is about what is/or could be on the surface of the moon, or maybe under the surface..who knows
I wish Vitto Saccari would come out of hiding and maybe do a follow up interview with Don. That interview Don did with him a few years back is one of the most gripping things I've ever listened to. Imagine seeing what he saw with those hi-rez images of structures on the moon..I mean..wow, that kind of thing would haunt you for the rest of your days!

I have a question though. Karl Wolfe , who was on the Disclosure Project press conference and stated he was shown photos of buildings/objects on the moon by a Nasa employee. ..If he was so terrified of people finding out he knew about this, then why on earth did he go public ? I wonder how many Nasa folks also know about these structures....

 

[trainedobserver]

I wish Vitto Saccari would come out of hiding and maybe do a follow up interview with Don. That interview Don did with him a few years back is one of the most gripping things I've ever listened to. Imagine seeing what he saw with those hi-rez images of structures on the moon..I mean..wow, that kind of thing would haunt you for the rest of your days!

I agree. Saccari is very convincing. I'm about 95% certain that he is telling the truth and that he saw undoctored NASA photographs. It seems unlikely that NASA would place these objects in photos just to show Saccari and his partner. While Saccari could be pulling Don's leg it seems incredibly cynical to think so. The reason I say I have some 5% or so of doubt is simple. Other countries and private parties must have photographic evidence showing these structures by now. Given the global political situation it seems improbable that such evidence would not revealed to further someone's political agenda.

Hey Don, have you been able to compile a list of lunar longitude and latitude information for some of these anomalies?

 

[owlman]

Maybe the secret space program ( of which I am convinced exists ) bombed the living heck out of those structures to 'hide' them from 3rd party observers?

Another good guest to have on regarding this subject ( for a future part 2 of the roundtable ) would be the co-author of Hoagland's ( yes, good old Dickie ) Dark Mission book. Mike Bara. He himself has a website on Lunar anomalies if I'm not mistaken, and has analyzed hundreds, if not thousands of moon photos.

 

[trainedobserver]

Maybe the secret space program ( of which I am convinced exists ) bombed the living heck out of those structures to 'hide' them from 3rd party observers?

I guess we could rationalize them away by any number of means but it doesn't seem like the approach to take. If these allegedly enormous structures were on the moon to be photographed there has to be some evidence for it beyond blurry pixilated photographs on the Internet. A short list of the major structures with longitude and latitude would be start. What are considered the top five structures for example? Can the longitude and latitude of those structures be sussed out?

 

[owlman]

I'm pretty sure that Richard Hoagland would the the man to speak to, regarding latitudes and longitudes, degrees and so-forth. He seems to be able to spend hours talking about the subject. Mad as a box of frogs he may be, but he HAS done the work on this stuff.
I can't see him ever being invited on The Paracast though
His latest 'work' was with Project Crap-alot for Christ's sake....

 

[CinderMoltenHowl]

Think about it - if the other countries have photographed the moon surface and found anomolies, would that country / organisation etc be willing to go out on a limb and produce the photographs and/or make comment on those photographs publically?

For example some countries may simply say "we build it, we paid for it, why should we share it?". Others may say if the photos are released into the public would it just simply increase debate i.e. photo analysts having debates over what the objects may be, lighting etc with no "real" discussion or result being achieved?

 

[trainedobserver]

Think about it - if the other countries have photographed the moon surface and found anomolies, would that country / organisation etc be willing to go out on a limb and produce the photographs and/or make comment on those photographs publically?

For example some countries may simply say "we build it, we paid for it, why should we share it?". Others may say if the photos are released into the public would it just simply increase debate i.e. photo analysts having debates over what the objects may be, lighting etc with no "real" discussion or result being achieved?

If you listen to people who say they have seen the real first generation photographs, there is no question. There seems to be no doubt in Vito Saccheri's mind, for example, as to what he saw at L.P.I. that day. He says he saw enormous construction and/or mining projects. He saw a disk shaped object. He saw activity as displayed in a series of photographs.

So it seems like there would be very little debate if these multiple high resolution images were made available to the public or to photographic experts to examine. According to witnesses they are irrefutable.

Why press conferences with poster sized blowup of the photos aren't being held to garner interest in and raise funds for the space program is beyond me. It would be something that would unify the interests of groups and nations like no other. Instead of Ronald Reagan making vague references to alien threats he could have had a very convincing slideshow for example. The potential political benefits greatly outweigh any possible negative ones. It's what so many politicians, program directors, and explorers have spent their lives looking for! They wouldn't use it? It seems so improbable to me, and yet I find Saccheri pretty convincing on the other hand. Like most it this stuff it just causes me to experience cognitive dissidence and the confusion that accompanies it. Why I do this to myself remains just as big a mystery to me as transient lunar phenomena.

 

[bbridges]

Just remember that telemetry passes through Langley before going anywhere.

---------- Post added at 10:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:11 AM ----------

Yeah, you'd think some Rick Perry style politico would get all over that.

 

[Jabbermocky]

How about Chris Knight, author of "Who Built the Moon?"? That said, I was a little dissapointed in the book as it took too much time re-explaining everything from his previous book (Uriel's Machine) to do with the megalithic yard etc. Otherwise, this is probably one of my favourite subjects. There was aslo a "scientist" on another podcasts I used to listen to (skeptic-type podcast), she had some fairly mundane explanations for some of the phenomena discussed, I'll track her name down and note it on here later.

Jerry

---------- Post added at 12:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 AM ----------

I found the the person I mentioned above -- well her name anyway. She may be familiar to some of you as it turns out that I was listening to a 2006 podcast, Astronomy Cast episiode 17: Where does the Monn Come from. Since then she has gone on to do her own podcasts on astronomy. Dr. Pamela Gay who has a B.S. in Astrophysis from Michigan State University in 1996 and a Ph.D. in Astronomy from the University of Texas in 2002; and now teaches at Southern Illinois University Edwardsville. Things may have changed since her original commentary, as one of the first things she says about the Moon is, "... it doesn't have things like water..."

 

[Wade]

when i got my newsletter i thought "lunar anomalies, Cool! a show about werewolves!" but then i saw it was about lunar structures and all the strange apparent transits observed over the years. (NASA Technical Report R-277.) oh well, that sounds like a good show as well

 

[icculus]

Bummer. I loved Don's previous moon shows and was really looking forward to this "roundtable" and fascinating topic. However, I feel it was wrecked by the breathless, gullible Mr. Childress. He's comedy, just like that crazy haired ancient alien guy. Also, his delivery was super annoying. Sorry, guy sounds full of it.

 

[owlman]

David did sound like he was doing the podcast from his treadmill at times, but I've always had mucho respect for the guy. He's not just your armchair investigator, this dude goes out and looks for stuff. Heck he's even more famous now, thanks To Ancient Aliens ( which I think is excellent ) And for the record, Georgio Tsoukalos (crazy hair and orange tan ) is awesome. He'd make a great future guest of the show. very quick, very articulate, and knows an awful lot about the topics he subscribes to.

 

[Decker]

For you all that wanted some more information on LTP and the Moon in general, here is a page from the DMR forum where I included a number of articles I have written in years past.

Decker

The Moon

 

[GeoShift]

Listened to the August 28[SUP]th[/SUP] 2011 Paracast along with the Darkmatters episodes Don posted links to about Moon anomalies along with reading the many articles he's posted recently. Thanks Don Fascinating stuff. I had to check out the way the Moon rotates around the Earth, with only one side facing us at all times. Apparently this is the norm throughout our Solar System and is called tidal synchronization. Everyone here probably knew this already but anyway, I thought our moon was unique in this respect, but its not, of course its still unique and amazing in its own way.

 

[grannysmith]

that crazy haired ancient alien guy.

Yeah he's great

 

[jimbo83478]

Bummer. I loved Don's previous moon shows and was really looking forward to this "roundtable" and fascinating topic. However, I feel it was wrecked by the breathless, gullible Mr. Childress. He's comedy, just like that crazy haired ancient alien guy. Also, his delivery was super annoying. Sorry, guy sounds full of it.

Agreed. Somebody needs to put a leash on this guy's imagination. He's starting to sound like Stephen Bassett...