<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Who Built the Moon?

April 29 2012 at 2:41 PM
Jackie  (Login BlueJudah)
Namaste

The moon has confounded scientists for many years. It does not obey the known rules of astrophysics and there is no theory of its origin that explains the known facts - in fact it should not really be there. When researching the ancient system of geometry and measurement used in the Stone Age that they discovered in their previous book, "Civilization One", the authors discovered to their great surprise that the system also works perfectly on the Moon! On further investigation, they found a consistent sequence of beautiful integer numbers when looking at every major aspect of the Moon - no pattern emerges for any other planet or moon in the solar system. For example, the Moon revolves at exactly one hundredth of the speed that the Earth turns on its axis; the Moon is exactly 400 times smaller than the Sun and is precisely 400 times closer to the Earth. They also discovered that the Moon possesses little or no heavy metals and has no core, in fact many specialists suspect that the Moon is hollow. If our Moon did not exist - nor would we. Experts are now agreed that higher life only developed on Earth because the Moon is exactly what it is and where it is! When all of the facts are dispassionately reviewed, it becomes unreasonable to cling to the idea that the Moon is a natural object. The only question that remains is who built it? "Thought-provoking" - "Daily Mail".


About the Author
Christopher Knight has written five very successful books. His first book, The Hiram Key, co-authored with Robert Lomas, was published in 1996 and it immediately went into the UK top ten, bestseller list and remained there for 8 consecutive weeks. It has since been translated into 37 languages and sold over a million copies worldwide, becoming a bestseller in several countries. Alan Butler, a qualified engineer, but always fascinated by history made himself into something of an expert in astrology and astronomy. He has published four successful books on the Knights Templar and the Grail legend. He is also a published playwright and a very successful radio dramatist. They are co-authors of the best selling Civilization One.


http://www.amazon.co.uk/Built-Moon-Christopher-Knight-Butler/dp/190585711X/ref=pd_cp_b_1



Looks interesting! I have always thought there is more to the moon than meets the eye and, although I have not read this particular book yet, I am come across other like ponderings that have made me, well, ponder! Smile. happy.gif


[linked image]


http://www.cookpr.com/press/watkins_moon.html = for one review of contents.



David Icke- Who Built the Moon..interesting interview pt.1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeWtaIAsX6k


[linked image]

[linked image]

[linked image]

Our BEAUTIFUL Moon!

happy.gif


IS THE MOON THE CREATION OF INTELLIGENCE?

by Mikhail Vasin and Alexander Shcherbakov, scientists
FROM THE EMINENT SOVIET JOURNAL: 'SPUTNIK'


Although people long ago began to wonder whether the "canals" on Mars were the creation of cosmic engineers, for some odd reason it has not occurred to look with the same eyes upon the peculiarities of the lunar landscape much closer at hand. And all the arguments about the possibilities of intelligent life existing on other celestial bodies have been confined to the idea that other civilisations must necessarily live on the surface of a planet, and that the interior as a habitat is out of the question.

Abandoning the traditional paths of "common sense", we have plunged into what may at first sight seem to be unbridled and irresponsible fantasy. But the more minutely we go into all the information gathered by man about the Moon, the more we are convinced that there is not a single fact to rule out our supposition. Not only that, but many things so far considered to be lunar enigmas are explainable in the light of this new hypothesis.

AN ARTIFICIAL SPUTNIK OF THE EARTH?

The origin of the Moon is one of the most complicated problems of cosmogony. So far there have been basically three hypotheses under discussion.

HYPOTHESIS I. The Moon was once a part of the Earth and broke away from it.

This has now been refuted by the evidence.

HYPOTHESIS II. The Moon was formed independently from the same cloud of dust and gas as the Earth, and immediately became the Earth's natural satellite.

But then why is there such a big difference between the specific gravity of the Moon (3.33 grammes per cubic centimetre) and that of the Earth (5.5 gr.)? Furthermore, according to the latest information (analysis of samples brought back by the U.S. Apollo astronauts) lunar rock is not of the same composition as the Earth's.

HYPOTHESIS III. The Moon came into being separately, and, moreover, far from the Earth (perhaps even outside the Solar system).

This would mean that the moon would not have to be fashioned from the same "clay" as our own planet. Sailing through the Universe, the Moon came into Earth's proximity, and by a complex interplay of forces of gravity was brought within a geocentric orbit, very close to circular. But a catch of this kind is virtually impossible.

In fact, scientists studying the origin of the Universe today have no acceptable theory to explain how the Earth-Moon system came into being.

OUR HYPOTHESIS: The Moon is an artificial Earth satellite put into orbit around the Earth by some intelligent beings unknown to ourselves.

We refuse to engage in speculation about who exactly staged this unique experiment, which only a highly developed civilisation was capable of.

A NOAH'S ARK?

If you are going to launch an artificial sputnik, then it is advisable to make it hollow. At the same time it would be naive to imagine that anyone capable of such a tremendous space project would be satisfied simply with some kind of giant empty trunk hurled into a near-Earth trajectory.

It is more likely that what we have here is a very ancient spaceship, the interior of which was filled with fuel for the engines, materials and appliances for repair work, navigation, instruments, observation equipment and all manner of machinery... in other words, everything necessary to enable this "caravelle of the Universe" to serve as a kind of Noah's Ark of intelligence, perhaps even as the home of a whole civilisation envisaging a prolonged (thousands of millions of years) existence and long wanderings through space (thousands of millions of miles).

Naturally, the hull of such a spaceship must be super-tough in order to stand up to the blows of meteorites and sharp fluctuations between extreme heat and extreme cold. Probably the shell is a double-layered affair--the basis a dense armouring of about 20 miles in thickness, and outside it some kind of more loosely packed covering (a thinner layer--averaging about three miles). In certain areas--where the lunar "seas" and "craters" are, the upper layer is quite thin, in some cases, non-existent.

Since the Moon's diameter is 2,162 miles, then looked at from our point of view it is a thin-walled sphere. And, understandably, not an empty one. There could be all kinds of materials and equipment on its inner surface. But the greatest proportion of the lunar mass is concentrated in the central part of the sphere, in its core, which has a diameter of 2,062 miles.

Thus the distance between the kernel and the shell of this nut is in the region of 30 miles. This space was doubtless filled with gases required for breathing, and for technological and other purposes.

With such an internal structure the Moon could have an average specific gravity if 3.3 grammes per cubic centimetre, which differs considerably from that of Earth (5.5 grammes per cubic centimetre).

A BATTLESHIP THEY COULDN'T TORPEDO?

The most numerous and interesting of the formations on the lunar surface are the craters. In diameter they vary considerably. Some are less that a yard across, while others are more than 120 miles (the biggest has a diameter of 148 miles). How does the Moon come to be so pockmarked?

There are two hypothesis--volcanic and meteoric. Most scientists vote for the latter.

Kirill Stanyukovich, a Soviet physicist, has written a whole series of works since 1937 in which he expounds the idea that the craters are the result of bombardment of the Moon for millions of years. And he really means bombardment, for even the smallest celestial body, when it is involved in one of those fastest head-on collisions so common in the cosmos behaves itself like a warhead charged with dynamite, or even an atomic warhead at times. Instant combustion takes place on impact, turning it into a dense cloud of incandescent gas, into plasma, and there is a very definite explosion.

According to Professor Stanykovich, a "missile" of a sizable character (say 6 miles in diameter) must, on collision with the Moon, penetrate to a depth equal to 4 or 5 times its own diameter (24-30 miles).

The surprising thing is that however big the meteorites may have been which have fallen on the Moon (some have been more than 60 miles in diameter), and however fast they must have been travelling (in some cases the combined speed was as much as 38 miles per second), the craters they have left behind are for some odd reason all about the same depth, 1.2-2 miles, although they vary tremendously in diameter.

Take that 148-mile diameter crater. In area it outdoes Hiroshima hundreds of times over. What a powerful explosion it must have been to send millions of tons of lunar rock fountaining over tens of miles! On the face of it, one would expect to find a very deep crater here, but nothing of the sort: there is three miles at the most between top and bottom levels, and one third of that is accounted for by the wall of rock thrown up around the crater like a toothed crown.

For such a big hole, it is too shallow. Furthermore, the bottom of the crater is convex, following the curve of the lunar surface. If you were to stand in the middle of the crater you would not even be able to see the soaring edge-- it would be beyond the horizon. A hollow that is more like a hill is a rather strange affair, perhaps.

Not really, if one assumes that when the meteorite strikes the outer covering of the moon, this plays the role of a buffer and the foreign body finds itself up against an impenetrable spherical barrier. Only slightly denting the 20-mile layer of armour plating, the explosion flings bits of its "coating" far and wide.

Bearing in mind that the Moon's defence coating is, according to our calculations, 2.5 miles thick, one sees that this is approximately the maximum depth of the craters.

A SPACESHIP COME TO GRIEF?

Now let us consider the chemical peculiarities of the lunar rock. Upon analysis, American scientists have found chromium, titanium and zirconium in it. These are all metals with refractory, mechanically strong and anti-corrosive properties. A combination of them all would have envitable resistance to heat and the ability to stand up to means of aggression, and could be used on Earth for linings for electrical furnaces.

If a material had to be devised to protect a giant artificial satellite from the unfavourable effects of temperature, from cosmic radiation and meteorite bombardment, the experts would probably have hit on precisely these metals. In that case it is not clear why lunar rock is such an extraordinarily poor heat conductor--a factor which so amazed the astronauts? Wasn't that what the designers of the super-sputnik of the Earth were after?

From the engineers point of view, this spaceship of ages long past which we call the Moon is superbly constructed. There may be a good reason for its extreme longevity. It is even possible that it predates our own planet. At any rate, some pieces of lunar rock have proved older than the oldest on Earth, although it is true, this applies to the age of the materials and not of the structure for which they were used. And from the number of craters on its surface, the Moon itself is no chicken.

It is, of course, difficult to say when it began to shine in the sky above the Earth, but on the basis of some preliminary estimates one might hazard a guess that it was around two thousand million years ago.

We do not, of course, imagine that the moon is still inhabited, and probably many of its automatic devices have stopped working, too. The stabilisers have ceased functioning and the poles have shifted. Even though the moon keeps that same side turned towards us, for some time it has been unsteady on its own axis, on occasion showing us part of its reverse side which were once invisible to observers on the Earth--for example, the Selenites themselves if they made expeditions here.

Time has taken its toll. Both body and rigging have disintegrated to some extent; some seams on the inner shell evidently diverged. We assume that the long (up to 940 miles) chains of small craters formerly ascribed to volcanic activity were brought about by eruptions of gas through cracks appearing in the armour plating as a result of accidents.

No doubt one of the most splendid features of the lunarscape--a straight "wall" nearly 500 yards high and over 60 miles long--formed as a result of one of the armour plates bending under the impact of celestial torpedoes and raising one of its straight, even edges.

The Moon's population presumeably took the necessary steps to remedy the effects of meteorite bombardment, for example, patching up rents in the outer shield covering the inner shell. For such purposes a substance from the lunar core was probably used, a kind a cement being made from it. After processing this would be piped to the surface sites where it was required.

Not long ago astronomers discovered variations in the gravitational fields near the large "seas". We believe the reason to be this: the Moon's dry seas are in fact areas from which the protective coating was torn from the armour cladding. To make good the damage to these vast tracts, the installation producing the repair substance would have had to be brought immediately beneath the site so that it could flood the area with is "cement". The resulting flat stretches are what look like seas to the terrestrial observer.

The stocks of materials and machinery for doing this are no doubt still where they were, and are sufficiently massive to give rise to these gravitational anomalies.

What is the Moon today? Is it a colossal necropolis, a "city of the dead," where some form of life became extinct? Is it a kind cosmic Flying Dutchman? A craft abandoned by its crew and controlled automatically? We do not know and we shall not try to guess.

WAITING FOR THE EVIDENCE

We have put forward in this article only a few of the reasons--unfortunately the evidence is so far only circumstantial--for our hypothesis, which at first glance may appear to be crazy.

A similar "crazy" idea was put forward in 1959 by Professor Iosif Shklovsky, an eminent scientist, in relation to the "moons" circling around Mars. After carefully weighing up the evidence he concludes that they are both hollow and therefore artificial satellites.

We feel that the questions we have raised in connection with our Moon provide sufficient food for serious thought on the matter; the result may be the illumination of our many lunar riddles.

Now, of course, we have to wait for direct evidence to support our idea. Or refute it.

Probably there will not be long to wait.

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/moon_spaceship.htm


[linked image]

http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2006/01jan/moon.html






[linked image]
[linked image]

 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply

JVH say
(Login JVH)
Sufi

Who built the Moons?

April 30 2012, 12:59 AM 

 

Science has been pondering the same about the moons of Mars




rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : falsifiability
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!
[linked image]

CD: short for inevitability

 
 Respond to this message   
Jackie
(Login BlueJudah)
Namaste

Ah, yes.

April 30 2012, 5:08 AM 

Thank U, J. I will take a lil ole look. happy.gif

Love
Jackie
happy.gif


http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicmars.htm

[linked image]


We have been lead to believe that our efforts into space have advanced along purely typical lines of scientific investigation of natural phenomena such as Mankind has always done on Earth. That quest has naturally moved outward to other worlds in our solar system and beyond as technology has allowed. Such is true in the greater sense of what Science is about. But the driving force of off-planet investigations has at its core a hidden agenda beyond that of our innate curiosity. The directed goal has been a search for answers to a troubling predicament: Where do the UFO's come from, and are they local to our solar system?

We are in the midst of a slow, scientific disclosure that started with our early space probes and is increasing in velocity at an ever-increasing rate. Under our watchful and frequently enthralled eyes we have been presented with a growing escalation of new discoveries every few weeks. The public knows these revelations as Martian meteorites with fossilized primitive life forms, water on Mars, and the Moon, Titian maybe harboring life in its oceans, Mars anomalies, and, recently, planets found around other stars. Without a doubt, the discovery of earth-like planets will be found any day now. Closer to home and in recent weeks, there has been a recent renewing of the argument over the results from the Viking “search for life” experiments in the late 1970s. Unbeknown to the public, that all-important question has never been fully or correctly answered.

What has never been discussed to any firm conclusion or even headed in the right direction is an important key that could have answered the question of life on Mars early on in our investigations of the planet. That finding was not about primitive life forms, but evidence of intelligent actions. But that surprise discovery was successfully kept hidden in plain sight with a very low level of interest shown in the data. (If that sounds like an incredible assertion, consider how the reality of UFOs have been kept from the public for over half a century.)

Being the giver of all data in the early years of space exploration, NASA has kept the lid on the secret, but times have changed. NASA (the US government) no longer has total control. It has partners and competitors with which to work and contend. The single-handed, iron-fisted control of data by NASA (and Malin) is gone. Politics and ideologies enter the picture of what we find out there and how to interpret and report it. Strangely enough or not, even our non-NASA, pro-ETs and pro-UFOs organizations, prominent writers in the field, and self-promoting showmen have not responded to the key data that resides in the public domain, dormant, virtually hidden from easy access. Perhaps it would be more correct to say there exists in some of these areas a “hands-off” policy coupled with overt attempts to focus attention elsewhere because this knowledge does explicitly explain straight away by implication the UFO phenomena.

First, we need to understand the evolution of the situation from the beginning to where it is now, crowded with more participants. Briefly, as the 1960s’ development of ICBMs grew to monstrous proportions, they were soon topped with smaller rockets to give an extended reach to orbital flight and eventually to missions to the planets. The simple charts we see of the numerous planetary launches, both successes and failures, by the Soviets and the US belie the course of events and the jockeying of the super-powers. Critical decisions were made. The Soviets chose Venus to explore as being the home of the ETs, and NASA aimed for Mars. Both nations dabbled somewhat in the territory of the other, but to no great success. It didn’t take much probing from the Soviets to prove Venus inhospitable. Strangely or not, their attempts to study Mars were almost totally disastrous. The NASA/JPL scientists joked that a Martian monster reached out and thwarted in some fashion about every Soviet effort thrown toward that planet. The Soviets had over thirty failed shots to Mars, one after another. Whatever the real reason, the Soviets were shut out on Mars despite their successes to Venus. On the other hand, almost all of NASA’s missions to Mars were successes. (And we have reason to doubt some reported failures!)

Mars, via the progressive discoveries of Mariners 6, 7 and finally, 9 in 1971, turned out to be the likely source for ETs in this solar system. True, it was indeed an alien environment as compared to Earth, but it was considered to be the last possible planet in the solar system that had even a minute chance of supporting (or having supported) some aspect of life.

At Carl Sagan’s urging, who sincerely believed life existed on Mars, mysterious Phobos was added to the Mariner 9 flight program. About 70 images of Phobos were returned. The quality of the images was not sterling, but enough data was recovered to show unsettling anomalies that piqued interest. In addition, the moon was not ball-shaped like a moon is usually considered, but it was similar to a chunk of rock, possibly a captured asteroid. From then on Phobos, itself, was high on the agenda for data acquisition in future Mars’ explorations although Mars itself remained the prime focus.

The Viking program began in 1968 and development started in 1969. The twin Viking probes were launched in 1975. The Viking Orbiters’ cameras were tasked with providing answers about both the surfaces of the planet and the twin moons of Phobos and Deimos. Yet the primary focus of the Viking twin missions was the “search for life” experiments done by scooping into the Martian soil. The biological experiments were where the attention was automatically focused, and perhaps eventually used to down-play the mysterious images of Phobos that showed signs of intelligent manipulation.



The full article at:

http://www.ufos-aliens.co.uk/cosmicmars.htm

[linked image]





[linked image]
[linked image]

 
 Respond to this message   
Jackie
(Login BlueJudah)
Namaste

J....

May 3 2012, 11:38 PM 

Have you ever read anything from John Lear? (the cube on the moon, and human souls?)

The whole moon is a machine...


Love
Jackie
happy.gif

[linked image]

[linked image]

 
 Respond to this message   
Jackie
(Login BlueJudah)
Namaste

Trapped in the cycle of rebirth by the Demiurge...

May 4 2012, 7:20 AM 

This is making a lot more sense now...



[linked image]

The war for our souls...


    
This message has been edited by BlueJudah on May 4, 2012 7:27 AM


 
 Respond to this message   

JVH say
(Login JVH)
Sufi

J....

May 8 2012, 7:51 AM 

Yes, I did.

 

- 'Our Mysterious SpaceShip Moon'

- Brinsley le Poer Trench

- Vasin-Shcherbakov

- Pauwels & Bergier

- Barbara Marciniak (your kind of stuff) happy.gif

etc.

 

P.S. and while you're at it, you might want to take a look at Saturn too.......


rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : falsifiability
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!
[linked image]

CD: short for inevitability


    
This message has been edited by JVH on May 11, 2012 8:42 AM
This message has been edited by JVH on May 11, 2012 5:08 AM
This message has been edited by JVH on May 11, 2012 5:07 AM
This message has been edited by JVH on May 11, 2012 5:02 AM
This message has been edited by JVH on May 11, 2012 4:53 AM
This message has been edited by JVH on May 11, 2012 4:51 AM
This message has been edited by JVH on May 11, 2012 4:37 AM


 
 Respond to this message   
Jackie
(Login BlueJudah)
Namaste

Ickey and The Moon

May 21 2012, 4:43 AM 



[linked image]

 
 Respond to this message   

JVH say
(Login JVH)
Sufi

Icke is somewhat behind

May 22 2012, 6:22 AM 

 ... isn't he? happy.gif


rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : falsifiability
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -

New!! Improved!! Now With CDEH-Formula!!
[linked image]

CD: short for inevitability

 
 Respond to this message   
Jackie
(Login BlueJudah)
Namaste

Yes, a little it seems

May 22 2012, 11:58 AM 

I guess he has just so much stuff 'on his mind. that even he has to get 'revelation' when he is ready for it. happy.gif BTW, this was from a couple of years ago, but still he missed the boat sonewhat!

Haha - best I can do. happy.gif



Our Mysterious Spaceship Moon


IS THE MOON A HOLLOWED-OUT SPACESHIP SENT TO ORBIT OUR EARTH IN THE REMOTE PREHISTORIC PAST? WAS IT ONCE INHABITED BY ALIEN SPACE TRAVELERS?
When two leading Soviet scientists recently proposed this theory, shockwaves reverberated throughout the entire scientific world. Now for the first time a book makes available the revelations that are causing a revolution in our knowledge of the Moon.

Here you will find the Soviet Artificial Moon Theory in its entirety, amazing actual transcripts from American Moon Missions that NASA has chosen not to publicize, and authoritative sightings and studies from leading astronomers all over the globe. OUR MYSTERIOUS SPACESHIP MOON is a compelling, enthralling and totally convincing work that opens our minds to what is quite possibly the greatest discovery man has ever made.

OUR ‘ONE SMALL STEP’ TO THE MOON COULD WELL BE A GREAT COSMIC LEAP TO OUR NEIGHBORS IN SPACE!


The most beautiful thing we can experience is the
mysterious. It is the source of all true art and
science.
-Albert Einstein


As I stand out here in the
wonders of the unknown
at Hadley, I try to realize there is a
fundamental truth to our nature.
man must explore.
and this is exploration at its
greatest.
-Astronaut David Scott
Apollo 15
August 7, 1971


PROLOGUE

Prepare to meet two Soviet scientists and their incredible theory which explains all the mysteries of the Moon. This book could very well be the most mind-boggling experience of your life.

When I first stumbled across the shocking Soviet theory revealing the true nature of the Moon, I was staggered. At first I found it unbelievable and naturally rejected it. Then, as scientific information from our Apollo expeditions brought back more and more facts that backed the Soviet theory, I found myself forced to accept it.

All my life I have been fascinated by the sky and the stars. The bright, fire-laden Moon was no exception. But I - like most other people - had learned to look upon her as just a close companion world of our Earth, a sometimes bright, sometimes absent light of the night. Like many, I had come to take her inconstant face and warm familiarity for granted.

Then in 1957 the Russians launched the world's first satellite and the Space Age began. Soon both superpowers of our planet - the U.S. and the 'S.U.' - were striving valiantly to reach the Moon. And after a decade of effort, man finally succeeded in reaching his neighbor in the sky.

Our landing on the Moon has been called man's greatest adventure. It has been described as,
"the greatest scientific, engineering and exploratory challenge in the history of the human race."
Ironically, it may prove to be more. The true makeup of this alien world could be the key to the very mystery of man himself!

For another story is lurking here that remains largely unknown - not only the strange encounters of American astronauts with an unknown alien presence on the Moon (as documented by NASA files), but the even more startling untold scientific account of the real nature of this strange lunar world.

Read this book and open-mindedly weigh the evidence. Perhaps you will come to agree that the theory of these two scholars from the Soviet Academy of Sciences is a most startling discovery. But even if you doubt their overwhelming findings, the Moon will never be the same to you again.

Never will you raise your eyes to look at her without wondering: IS IT OR ISN'T IT AN ALIEN SPACESHIP WORLD?


[linked image]




[linked image]

 
 Respond to this message   
Current Topic - Who Built the Moon?
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index