***Please Save The Moon***

[777equals666]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5noZ-SQc0g&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmOnO6awOUk&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggc1-jB2lhQ&feature=player_embedded

This is a real and factual event which can have repercussions that will effect all inhabitants on Earth in a very bad way if NASA goes through with this "experiment". NASA wants to officially bomb the Moon on October 8th, 2009.

PLEASE VISIT:

TBLN Films (http://www.tblnfilms.com)

and Vote "NO" for NASA exploding a Missle on the Moon.


Source information:

NASA's mission to bomb the Moon: Scientific American (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasas-mission-to-bomb-the-moon-2009-06)

NASA Launches Lunar Rocket (http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/scitech/space/news_wluk_cape_canaveral_nasa_launches_lunar_rocke t_200906190717_rev1)

[venividivici2311]

Does anybody remember the scene from the movie time machine???
you wouldn't want that to happen do you??? :eek:

[kasalt]

Perhaps their goal is to destroy evidence of mining...or what remains of a ruined civilization on the moon.

I voted no: http://www.tblnfilms.com/

[decim]

bomb the Moon on October 8th, 2009

This is also the date set for the 2nd Irish referendum on the Liesborn Treaty.

Interesting 'coincidence'..

[diky]

PLEASE VISIT:

TBLN Films

and Vote "NO" for NASA exploding a Missle on the Moon.



what are you doing with the votes?

[size_of_light]

Remember the scene in Invaders From Mars when Tim Robbins as President was confronted with the option of destroying the moon?

"Would anybody miss it?"

:D

No, no, but getting serious for a moment, yeah, yeah, must save the moon.

[777equals666]

what are you doing with the votes?

We will show case to the world via the internet the results either which way the people have choosen and you never know, if you help make this VIRAL by sharing this with every person you communicate to and others do the same, imagine how NASA will feel if over a Hundred Million world citzens have openly voted against the bombing of the Moon. NASA in the likely hood will still Bomb the Moon regardless of any world out cry, but I know with over a hundred million world citzens in favor against future moon bombing acts, something is going to change for the better and your grand children will thank you everyday after for your patronage to humanity and life as we know it....:D

[diky]

We will show case to the world via the internet the results either which way the people have choosen and you never know, if you help make this VIRAL by sharing this with every person you communicate to and others do the same, imagine how NASA will feel if over a Hundred Million world citzens have openly voted against the bombing of the Moon. NASA in the likely hood will still Bomb the Moon regardless of any world out cry, but I know with over a hundred million world citzens in favor against future moon bombing acts, something is going to change for the better and your grand children will thank you everyday after for your patronage to humanity and life as we know it....:D

and your site would have a hundred million visits, everyone's a winner (except NASA)

are you going to show the results to NASA?

[tracker]

I voted no: http://www.tblnfilms.com/

SAME AS .

:cool:

[kingmonkey]

They're not exploding anything nuclear on the moon. It's more internet bollocks.

Nice way for someone to get traffic to their website though :rolleyes:

[diky]

I voted no: tblnfilms.com

well done, you've saved the moon

why dont you send the TBLN Films website link round to all your friends, then you can help promote their website too

[777equals666]

and your site would have a hundred million visits, everyone's a winner (except NASA)

are you going to show the results to NASA?

NASA, The Asssociated Press, United Nations, etc.... I can see how a person would consider this "Save the Moon" campaign as too optimistic and it probably is, but its the only thing I can do other than march and protest in front of cape canaveral in florida in a pickett line in hopes of driving the importance of this message.

Please show support!

[kingmonkey]

NASA, The Asssociated Press, United Nations, etc....

Well, you're gonna look a fool, because there is no nuclear explosion.

[elton]

NASA, The Asssociated Press, United Nations, etc.... I can see how a person would consider this "Save the Moon" campaign as too optimistic and it probably is, but its the only thing I can do other than march and protest in front of cape canaveral in florida in a pickett line in hopes of driving the importance of this message.

Please show support!


I understand that the rocket carrying the bomb has gone the wrong way anyway so the problem is averted.

[diky]

NASA, The Asssociated Press, United Nations, etc.... I can see how a person would consider this "Save the Moon" campaign as too optimistic and it probably is, but its the only thing I can do other than march and protest in front of cape canaveral in florida in a pickett line in hopes of driving the importance of this message.

Please show support!

excuse me if i'm sceptical but everything you post is a thinly veiled marketing ploy

[lightblessins]

i really wont worry bout this at all, nasa knows whos up there, they know they cant simply bomb it just to test a few new devices,its something that wont happen, if on the very very very very small chance it does, which it wont, then the come out will be very interesting. :)

[kingmonkey]

i really wont worry bout this at all, nasa knows whos up there, they know they cant simply bomb it just to test a few new devices,its something that wont happen, if on the very very very very small chance it does, which it wont, then the come out will be very interesting. :)


They're not bombing it...There's no bomb - nuclear or otherwise.

[elton]

They're not bombing it...There's no bomb - nuclear or otherwise.

How do you know that? Those NASA guys are evil bastards so they could easily make a nuke.

[kingmonkey]

How do you know that? Those NASA guys are evil bastards so they could easily make a nuke.


Why would they? Give me one good reason to suggest they're not doing exactly what they say they're doing.

[elton]

Why would they? Give me one good reason to suggest they're not doing exactly what they say they're doing.

Because they never tell the truth. They lied about landing there in 1969 so why believe them now?

[kingmonkey]

Because they never tell the truth. They lied about landing there in 1969 so why believe them now?


A) you don't know they lied about the moon landing, and B) they'll be thousands of telescopes from all over the world on the moon when the impact happens. C) launching a nuclear weapon in space could quite easily start WW3. D) there are hundreds if not thousands of people working on the project; many of which have got nothing to do with NASA.

[elton]

A) you don't know they lied about the moon landing, and B) they'll be thousands of telescopes from all over the world on the moon when the impact happens. C) launching a nuclear weapon in space could quite easily start WW3. D) there are hundreds if not thousands of people working on the project; many of which have got nothing to do with NASA.

Of course they lied about the moon landing. There are loads of threads on that. Remember the fluttering flag?

[kasalt]

NASA's mission to bomb the Moon (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasas-mission-to-bomb-the-moon-2009-06) -- Scientific American

Nasa prepares to bomb the moon (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/space/5566137/Nasa-prepares-to-bomb-the-moon.html) -- Telegraph.co.uk

US TO BOMB MOON (http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct2=us%2F0_0_s_1_1_aa&usg=AFQjCNHDfaQiAo88Pd_FGuEohsoV3Bkoiw&cid=1373680298&ei=Sg9ZSqizMJ608wTiyPWCAg&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mirror.co.uk%2Fnews%2Ftop-stories%2F2009%2F06%2F18%2Fu-s-to-bomb-moon-115875-21450011%2F) -- Mirror.co.uk

NASA launches mission to bomb the moon (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25659495-401,00.html) -- NEWS.com.au



(http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasas-mission-to-bomb-the-moon-2009-06)

[kingmonkey]

Of course they lied about the moon landing. There are loads of threads on that. Remember the fluttering flag?

I'm sure there are loads of threads on it, it's a conspiracy forum and I also know what they all say, which is why I'm not gonna get into it on this one

http://www.redzero.demon.co.uk/moonhoax/Flag.htm

Believe what you will...

NASA's mission to bomb the Moon (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasas-mission-to-bomb-the-moon-2009-06) -- Scientific American

Nasa prepares to bomb the moon (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/space/5566137/Nasa-prepares-to-bomb-the-moon.html) -- Telegraph.co.uk

US TO BOMB MOON (http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct2=us%2F0_0_s_1_1_aa&usg=AFQjCNHDfaQiAo88Pd_FGuEohsoV3Bkoiw&cid=1373680298&ei=Sg9ZSqizMJ608wTiyPWCAg&rt=SEARCH&vm=STANDARD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mirror.co.uk%2Fnews%2Ftop-stories%2F2009%2F06%2F18%2Fu-s-to-bomb-moon-115875-21450011%2F) -- Mirror.co.uk

NASA launches mission to bomb the moon (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25659495-401,00.html) -- NEWS.com.au



(http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasas-mission-to-bomb-the-moon-2009-06)


And they're all wrong. Using the phrase "bombing the moon" is just journalist spin to grab readers...All they're doing, is crashing the top half of the rocket that carries the water detection equipment into the lunar surface.

[kasalt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=052DosGtJLs

[kingmonkey]

If anyone is remotely interested:

http://lcross.arc.nasa.gov/index.htm

[lightblessins]

They're not bombing it...There's no bomb - nuclear or otherwise.

agreed :)

[coco]

Remember the scene in Invaders From Mars when Tim Robbins as President was confronted with the option of destroying the moon?

"Would anybody miss it?"

:D

No, no, but getting serious for a moment, yeah, yeah, must save the moon.

I thought that was 'The Spy Who Shagged Me'.

General Hawk: Sir, are you suggesting that we blow up the moon?
The President: Would you miss it? (to the other generals) Would you miss it?
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Austin_Powers:_The_Spy_Who_Shagged_Me

:)

[kasalt]

All they're doing, is crashing the top half of the rocket that carries the water detection equipment into the lunar surface.

And that, in effect, is a kinetic bomb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment).

LCROSS -- Mission Overvie Movie:
http://lcross.arc.nasa.gov/mission.htm

[kingmonkey]

And that, in effect, is a kinetic bomb (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment).

LCROSS -- Mission Overvie Movie:
http://lcross.arc.nasa.gov/mission.htm


Which is not nuclear. Or technically a bomb.

[coco]

Could not the great effort, the great minds and certainly the great amount of money be better used on Earth?

[kasalt]

Which is not nuclear. Or technically a bomb.

It certainly isn't a nuclear bomb...would like to know where the OP got that idea.

But to say that it isn't "technically a bomb" at all is simply to argue over semantics. That fact is that the force of the planned impact will be equal to a very significant explosion.

[kingmonkey]

It certainly isn't a nuclear bomb...would like to know where the OP got that idea.


From one of those silly videos in the post.

[kingmonkey]

Could not the great effort, the great minds and certainly the great amount of money be better used on Earth?


Maybe, but finding water on the moon would be the first step in creating the first "off-world" base for humanity. It'd enable them to build on there without transporting water, which costs about 100,000 dollars a gallon to transport.

[coco]

Maybe, but finding water on the moon would be the first step in creating the first "off-world" base for humanity. It'd enable them to build on there without transporting water, which costs about 100,000 dollars a gallon to transport.

I understand the reason for this exploration and considered transportation cost as a factor but my point is the tremendous brainpower, effort and money could be better used to serve the Earth's inhabitants.

Just my thought: Essentially, take care of your own yard before considering a venture into another.

Although I confess the subject is nonetheless interesting as well as the comments posted.

[des1000]

Heres a link to the Enterprise mission site..
http://www.enterprisemission.com/SmokingGun.htm

Richard c hoagland was on coast to coast the other night, he did mention that if they where using the impact to destroy evidence of a secret space program that has been going on, on the moon they would have to nuke it and blame the explosion on hitting a gas pocket.

[diky]

NASA, The Asssociated Press, United Nations, etc.... I can see how a person would consider this "Save the Moon" campaign as too optimistic and it probably is, but its the only thing I can do other than march and protest in front of cape canaveral in florida in a pickett line in hopes of driving the importance of this message.

Please show support!
excuse me if i'm sceptical but everything you post is a thinly veiled marketing ploy

I'm posting this again to see if anyone has an opinion on it :)

[777equals666]

I understand that the rocket carrying the bomb has gone the wrong way anyway so the problem is averted.
If you could kindly provide me a source to were you recieved this infomration? THX's!

They're not exploding anything nuclear on the moon. It's more internet bollocks
Nice way for someone to get traffic to their website though

If you think so....

excuse me if i'm sceptical but everything you post is a thinly veiled marketing ploy

I'm posting this again to see if anyone has an opinion on it :)

Your excused.... You are also welcomed to your skepticism even though you may have not considered that it doesn't cost you a penny to vote and its completely free to watch any of TBLN films online. Yes, I do want people to know they can enjoy TBLN films for free online but this Moon campaign is a serious matter to me and my people. Jose has recieved over 50 million views on his first UFO film online since 2002, so marketing and advertisement is not my purpose for this topic when there are millions of people who already know about TBLN and the films we make...

Maybe, but finding water on the moon would be the first step in creating the first "off-world" base for humanity. It'd enable them to build on there without transporting water, which costs about 100,000 dollars a gallon to transport.

As reported by CBS Evening News, Friday, Oct 15, 1971
Space scientist, Dr. John West Freeman, Junior, of Rice University reports instruments, left on the Moon by Apollo XII and XIV crews, detect water cloud as mentioned in the Save the Moon films I presented. I would disagree with anybody that the purpose of this mission is to discover "Water on the Moon"; what NASA should already know and have claimed to already discovered from past experiments and public record reports.

They're not bombing it...There's no bomb - nuclear or otherwise.

NASA claims officially that they are crashing the satelite into the Moon at twice the speed of a bullet to create a huge debris plume that can be seen from earth using an ameuter telescope. Nuclear war head, bomb or not, they intended to create the same end result as one, an explosition which they claim is to ascertain wether water is present under the Moon's surface, something they also claimed they have previously discovered as far back as 1971.

If I were asking you for your Credit Card number to VOTE then you should be concerned but this will never be the case... VOTE TO SAVE THE MOON!

[size_of_light]

I thought that was 'The Spy Who Shagged Me'.

General Hawk: Sir, are you suggesting that we blow up the moon?
The President: Would you miss it? (to the other generals) Would you miss it?
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Austin_Powers:_The_Spy_Who_Shagged_Me

:)

You're right! Thanks. No wonder I couldn't find anything on the net about it :D

(And it was 'Mars Attacks' anyway, not Invaders from Mars. D'oh.)

[kingmonkey]

NASA claims officially that they are crashing the satelite into the Moon at twice the speed of a bullet to create a huge debris plume that can be seen from earth using an ameuter telescope.

Thanks for that, I know what they're doing. Meteors hit the moon all the time - and have done for god knows how many millions of years...They're quite often thousand times the size of this thing and travel much, much faster.


Nuclear war head, bomb or not, they intended to create the same end result as one


Only in your mind they are. That's like saying throwing a rock and a hand grenade at something is the same thing. Nor is it breeching the outer space treaty as the video claims (which they also got the name wrong for).

[jamesc]

Thanks for that, I know what they're doing. Meteors hit the moon all the time - and have done for god knows how many millions of years...They're quite often thousand times the size of this thing and travel much, much faster.



Only in your mind they are. That's like saying throwing a rock and a hand grenade at something is the same thing. Nor is it breeching the outer space treaty as the video claims (which they also got the name wrong for).



So what's the problem? Here are just a few of the facts that come to light::cool:

1. Exploding a bomb on the moon will displace several miles of Lunar material according to what NASA claims will happen.

2. The displacement of lunar material will follow Newton's law about equal and opposite reaction. This means that an equal force will be exerted on the Moon to match the force it takes to eject miles of material. No one can actually predict what will happen, just as NASA failed miserably predicting the results of another experiment. In a previous mission, a NASA spacecraft fired a high velocity copper warhead penetrator into a comet's core. The results were not what they expected. This is because popular science theory really believes comets are dirty snowballs. Instead, the actual results were already predicted by the electric universe theory. Comets are not dirty snowballs which is something many of us already knew. Yet again, NASA refused to use common sense and look at theories based on real evidence and science, such as the electric universe theory.

3. If the McDonald Moon ranging project is cancelled, no one will be able to measure the displacement of the Moon caused by the explosion. Perhaps this is the idea by cancelling the project.

4. Exploding a bomb on the Moon is against all international laws and treaties. NASA doesn't own the Moon and they never will, and as such have no right to instigate such madness. This madness is on a par with the utterly insane space elevator.

5. Last but not least is the water issue. This is one follows yet another big lie. Almost every book about our solar system claims it is nearly a perfect vacuum. So how does water behave when exposed to a reduced atmosphere? The speed it evaporates (sublimates) is in proportion to the amount of atmosphere present. If a window blows out of a plane at 50,000 ft. water and blood will boil. And that's not even in a very good vacuum.:D

And here's what it all comes down to water disappears completely in a vacuum. Therefore, the idea of NASA finding water on the Moon by exploding a bomb in a vacuum on the Moon is utterly ridiculous. Heat from the bomb combined with the vacuum will flash-evaporate any trace water so fast it cannot not be measured.:D No two ton bomb has ever exploded without generating tremendous heat, and this heat will blind infrared sensors. Long before the sub-lunar surface cools off to take a reading, any water will be long gone. So the idea of using a bomb to find water is wrong on many levels.:cool:

There also remains an even bigger and more important question what happens if they disturb the Moon's orbit? Few people alive today remember what NASA said when the spent Lunar Landers were ejected and crashed into the Moon. NASA stated that the seismograph instruments the Apollo crew left behind showed that after a Lunar Lander crashed into the Moon, that it "made the Moon ring like a bell for more than 30 minutes." Would this same thing happen if the Moon were made of solid rock?

The Lunar Lander ascent stage weighed just 10,334kg. which is about the equivalent weight of an 11 ton truck.

The mass of the Moon has been calculated to be 7.36 1022 kilograms. That's a 7.36 followed by 22 zeroes.

So how could an 11 ton spacecraft, which weighs even less on the Moon because gravity is 1/6 that of Earth - make 7,360,000,000,000,000,000,000 kilograms of rock ring for half an hour? Who could believe this?

This appears to strongly prove the Moon MUST be hollow. And if the Moon is actually hollow, it will take far less to disturb its orbit than anyone currently realizes. How many millions of kilograms of force will bombing the Moon generate? We are not being told that figure.

Disturbing the Moon's orbit may cause tidal waves and quite possibly Earthquakes in many zones around the Earth where edges of tectonic plates are already at or near the breaking point of sliding. The stress caused by a sudden shift in the Moon's gravitational pull could be a serious catastrophe. Who knows what it might do to the Yellowstonesuper-volcano which is already heating up and has made larger areas of Yellowstone park unusable.


The above information on the REASONS NASA are doing this and the reasons WHY it is a some screen for something else is evident from the article above.

" Therefore, the idea of NASA finding water on the Moon by exploding a bomb in a vacuum on the Moon is utterly ridiculous. Heat from the bomb combined with the vacuum will flash-evaporate any trace water so fast it cannot not be measured.:D No two ton bomb has ever exploded without generating tremendous heat, and this heat will blind infrared sensors. Long before the sub-lunar surface cools off to take a reading, any water will be long gone. So the idea of using a bomb to find water is wrong on many levels".:rolleyes:

Is the last paragraph not debunking NASA"S REASONS on doing this experiment.The twice the speed of a bullet device impacting on the moons surface and the force generated is likened or SIMILAR to bombing a part of the moons surface.The fact that this force will be great is significant for cause for concern.When was the last time a meteor of the same force generated by this device or greater than the the force of this device hit the moon in our life times.There have been climatic changes in our earth's history some NOT related to the moon being hit by a meteor i may add but who knows what conceqwencies it had here on earth in our PAST.NASA know little enough about the moon as it stands , hence them trying to find out about water,FFS.Also WHY know, WHY not in the past did they not decide to find out more about the moons surface and possible water evidence. WHY did they say ,"THE MOON RANG LIKE A BELL", AFTER A IMPACT, WHY DID THEY SAY THEY HAVE DETECTED WATER ALREADY IN THE PAST?? These things to me anyway are smoking guns, if they have either LIED or KEPT SILENT on anomalies about the moon in the past then WHY is there no danger of them doing it NOW about this bombing of the moon???

[kingmonkey]

So what's the problem? Here are just a few of the facts that come to light::cool:

Facts eh? Says who?


1. Exploding a bomb on the moon will displace several miles of Lunar material according to what NASA claims will happen.



They're not exploding a bomb!!!

2. The displacement of lunar material will follow Newton's law about equal and opposite reaction. This means that an equal force will be exerted on the Moon to match the force it takes to eject miles of material. No one can actually predict what will happen

Yes they can. You just answered it. It'll displace said amount of material, possibly a bit moer or less depending on surface etc.


, just as NASA failed miserably predicting the results of another experiment. In a previous mission, a NASA spacecraft fired a high velocity copper warhead penetrator into a comet's core. The results were not what they expected. This is because popular science theory really believes comets are dirty snowballs. Instead, the actual results were already predicted by the electric universe theory. Comets are not dirty snowballs which is something many of us already knew. Yet again, NASA refused to use common sense and look at theories based on real evidence and science, such as the electric universe theory.


That may be true; but it's irrelevent. Scientific development is based on people being proved wrong.



4. Exploding a bomb on the Moon is against all international laws and treaties. NASA doesn't own the Moon and they never will, and as such have no right to instigate such madness. This madness is on a par with the utterly insane space elevator.


There's no bomb! It's also not against the Outer Space Treaty.

http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/SpaceLaw/outerspt.html



5. Last but not least is the water issue. This is one follows yet another big lie. Almost every book about our solar system claims it is nearly a perfect vacuum. So how does water behave when exposed to a reduced atmosphere? The speed it evaporates (sublimates) is in proportion to the amount of atmosphere present. If a window blows out of a plane at 50,000 ft. water and blood will boil. And that's not even in a very good vacuum.:D

And here's what it all comes down to water disappears completely in a vacuum. Therefore, the idea of NASA finding water on the Moon by exploding a bomb in a vacuum on the Moon is utterly ridiculous. Heat from the bomb combined with the vacuum will flash-evaporate any trace water so fast it cannot not be measured.:D No two ton bomb has ever exploded without generating tremendous heat, and this heat will blind infrared sensors. Long before the sub-lunar surface cools off to take a reading, any water will be long gone. So the idea of using a bomb to find water is wrong on many levels.:cool:


THERE IS NO BOMB.This is getting boring now.


There also remains an even bigger and more important question what happens if they disturb the Moon's orbit?

It's not big enough. How do you think the moon has stayed in orbit so long from meteor bombardment? Most of which dwarf what NASA are planning?


Few people alive today remember what NASA said when the spent Lunar Landers were ejected and crashed into the Moon. NASA stated that the seismograph instruments the Apollo crew left behind showed that after a Lunar Lander crashed into the Moon, that it "made the Moon ring like a bell for more than 30 minutes." Would this same thing happen if the Moon were made of solid rock?


Hollow moon propaganda. Not getting into that. It's a different issue.


The Lunar Lander ascent stage weighed just 10,334kg. which is about the equivalent weight of an 11 ton truck.


And the thing NASA are crashing weighs less than a fifth of that.



This appears to strongly prove the Moon MUST be hollow. And if the Moon is actually hollow, it will take far less to disturb its orbit than anyone currently realizes. How many millions of kilograms of force will bombing the Moon generate? We are not being told that figure.


THERE IS NO BOMB.


Disturbing the Moon's orbit may cause tidal waves and quite possibly Earthquakes in many zones around the Earth where edges of tectonic plates are already at or near the breaking point of sliding. The stress caused by a sudden shift in the Moon's gravitational pull could be a serious catastrophe. Who knows what it might do to the Yellowstonesuper-volcano which is already heating up and has made larger areas of Yellowstone park unusable.


As I've already said, meteors hit the moon all the time and don't damage it. Most of which have been many times bigger than what NASA are planning.



" Therefore, the idea of NASA finding water on the Moon by exploding a bomb in a vacuum on the Moon is utterly ridiculous. Heat from the bomb combined with the vacuum will flash-evaporate any trace water so fast it cannot not be measured.:D No two ton bomb has ever exploded without generating tremendous heat, and this heat will blind infrared sensors. Long before the sub-lunar surface cools off to take a reading, any water will be long gone. So the idea of using a bomb to find water is wrong on many levels".:rolleyes:


The only thing "wrong on so many levels" is the dickhead who wrote all this. THERE IS NO BOMB. It's fucking hilarious that one man or group can claim things to be wrong, when everyone else says they're right. It's not just NASA that have designed this project; there are countless people involved, in many different fields...But this lone guy on the net is apparently cleverer than them all.

He's that clever he's based his entire piece of fear mongering garbage on a complete fallacy. Again, there is no bomb. The moon will be fine.

[elton]

I agree with James. It is a bomb but I heard that the carrier craft is headed in the wrong direction.

If they get it back on course I am worried what the response will be though.

[kingmonkey]

I agree with James. It is a bomb but I heard that the carrier craft is headed in the wrong direction.

If they get it back on course I am worried what the response will be though.


There's no explosives, nor is there a nuclear reaction. So how is it a bomb? It's a big lump of space junk crashing into the moon, which actually is the carrier craft(or part of it at least).

Where did you here it was off course?

[diky]

I agree with James. It is a bomb but I heard that the carrier craft is headed in the wrong direction.

If they get it back on course I am worried what the response will be though.

You have a very strange reasoning process, I would be deeply concerned if you were ever called up for jury duty.

what makes you think its a bomb?

[father ted]

Does anybody remember the scene from the movie time machine???
you wouldn't want that to happen do you??? :eek:

That's what I was thinking as well. But if they destroy the moon completely, the illuminati will pretty much loose everything that they "worked" for. Plus, the second moon would be exposed (if there is one behind it).

I think they know hwat they're doing and how they're doing it.

[kasalt]

That's like saying throwing a rock and a hand grenade at something is the same thing.

A rock almost may as well be the same thing as a hand grenade if the rock is traveling at "more than twice the speed of a bullet".

[kingmonkey]

A rock almost may as well be the same thing as a hand grenade if the rock is traveling at "more than twice the speed of a bullet".


Maybe. But it's still a tiny thing to hit the moon and is not gonna cause any catastrophe. The copper core impactor mentioned in jamesc's post, smashed into a meteor that was vastly smaller than the moon, at 23,000 mph. The moon one will be going about 5600 mph.

It's bigger, fair enough, but so is the moon (thousands of times so) in relation to the comet. And the copper one was solid, the one hitting the moon is not.

[777equals666]

There's no bomb! It's also not against the Outer Space Treaty.

http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/SpaceLaw/outerspt.html

Taken from the above website you posted:

Outer Space Treaty

34/68. Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies

Article 7 #1

"In exploring and using the moon, States Parties shall take measures to prevent the disruption of the existing balance of its environment, whether by introducing adverse changes in that environment, by its harmful contamination through the introduction of extra-environmental matter or otherwise."

Bomb or not; crashing into the Moon in an attempt to open up the ground to find water underneath would be disrupting the natural balance and enviroment of the Moon. Maybe you disagree with all of my statements in regards to this subject and you have every right to, but your own link proves that NASA is violating Article #7 from the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs. ;)

Jamesc: I agree with you.

[kingmonkey]

"In exploring and using the moon, States Parties shall take measures to prevent the disruption of the existing balance of its environment, whether by introducing adverse changes in that environment, by its harmful contamination through the introduction of extra-environmental matter or otherwise."

By that reasoning there should never have been anyone on the moon and no missions whatsoever. Why are you being purposely pedantic and trying to prove an irrelevant point? The people and the countries who signed up to the agreement have no issue with it, and fortunately you have no power to stop it. Why is it such an issue?

Answer: it's not. And it's because they all recognize the merit in it, and understand there really is no adverse changes: it's just another crater on a celestial body covered in millions of others.

If it's such a terrible thing, why aren't the rest of the world up in arms about it? Do you not think every other space capable country would like to hamper NASA's development?


Bomb or not; crashing into the Moon in an attempt to open up the ground to find water underneathNice way of putting it; I commend your dramatic prose...But what they're really doing is the equivalent of firing a bullet into the desert and then flying a detector through it. I don't think you understand how small an issue this is in comparison to the scale of the moon. But I suppose this is a conspiracy forum, so a certain amount of paranoia and fear is par for the course. If you weren't so paranoid about the whole thing you might find it interesting.

But at least you've finally accepted it's not a bomb.

[kasalt]

But at least you've finally accepted it's not a bomb.

The impact will have the explosive force of a bomb.

"Projectiles which do not contain an explosive charge are termed kinetic projectile, kinetic energy weapon, kinetic warhead or kinetic penetrator...All of these weapons work by attaining a high muzzle velocity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_velocity) (hypervelocity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervelocity)), and collide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collision) with their objective, releasing kinetic energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy)...Since they need to attain a high velocity anyway, they can destroy their target with their released kinetic energy alone; explosives are not necessary."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projectile#Kinetic_projectiles

[kingmonkey]

The impact will have the explosive force of a bomb.

"Projectiles which do not contain an explosive charge are termed kinetic projectile, kinetic energy weapon, kinetic warhead or kinetic penetrator...All of these weapons work by attaining a high muzzle velocity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_velocity) (hypervelocity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypervelocity)), and collide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collision) with their objective, releasing kinetic energy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy)...Since they need to attain a high velocity anyway, they can destroy their target with their released kinetic energy alone; explosives are not necessary."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Projectile#Kinetic_projectiles


O.K, if you wanna call it a bomb we'll call it a bomb. But it's not a bomb. Hence it not being called a "bomb"! :D A bomb releases heat energy (exothermic reaction), a Kinetic energy weapon releases kinetic energy

But, yeah, it has a similar effect as a bomb but does not contain any explosives or a nuclear reaction. Which is important because the video in the original post makes the claim it was nuclear. The important difference is it's kinetic energy; not heat energy. The water won't vaporize due to the impact,it'll be too small and to brief to vaporize it all (mission rationale from NASA (http://lcross.arc.nasa.gov/rationale.htm)), but it will vaporize due to the sun and they already know this:

As the ejecta rises above the target crater’s rim and is exposed to sunlight, any water-ice, hydrocarbons or organics will vaporize and break down into their basic components. These components primarily will be monitored by the visible and infrared spectrometers. The near-infrared and mid-infrared cameras will determine the total amount and distribution of water in the debris plume. The spacecraft’s visible camera will track the impact location and the behavior of the debris plume while the visible radiometer will measure the flash created by the Centaur impact. But even then the scale is still important; the vast scale of the moon vs the relatively small energy release is still the main issue.

LCROSS & LRO Pre Launch Briefing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-GXjR_CZSE) (Scaled cgi of impact around 24:30)

[777equals666]

By that reasoning there should never have been anyone on the moon and no missions whatsoever. Why are you being purposely pedantic and trying to prove an irrelevant point? The people and the countries who signed up to the agreement have no issue with it, and fortunately you have no power to stop it. Why is it such an issue?

Answer: it's not. And it's because they all recognize the merit in it, and understand there really is no adverse changes: it's just another crater on a celestial body covered in millions of others.

You may be right kingmonkey, that shooting this satelite into the Moon will do absolutely nothing to the Earth as a result and the dead-lifeless crater NASA claims they are shooting at as well, but if you have seen Moon Rising at TBLN Films for Free online, one can logically and simply concur that it aint just craters up there based on the evidence that is put forth throughout the film.

If you consider the "ethical reasoning" behind this UN law then by example when applied in a legal situation can go something like this; you can visit the Moon and conduct any experiment you please, but to conduct an experiment that can be destructive or alter the natural eco-system of the Moon is wrong and the Nations of the World have at least agreed openly on the UN Floor to this extent.

If it's such a terrible thing, why aren't the rest of the world up in arms about it? Do you not think every other space capable country would like to hamper NASA's development?
Actually, the other nations of the world are aggressively trying to get to the Moon as well... Word got out on what's up there and NASA is using this "experiment" as a cover to clean up a little mess they left behind up there....

Nice way of putting it; I commend your dramatic prose... But what they're really doing is the equivalent of firing a bullet into the desert and then flying a detector through it. I don't think you understand how small an issue this is in comparison to the scale of the moon. But I suppose this is a conspiracy forum, so a certain amount of paranoia and fear is par for the course. If you weren't so paranoid about the whole thing you might find it interesting.

But at least you've finally accepted it's not a bomb.

I am willing to except that it is not a "text-book" definition of a Bomb even though it will create the same end result and I understand fully the experiment that NASA is conducting and have taken the time to read the "P.R science" they have made public on the Missions official website, but you know how the the saying goes, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and smells like a duck, it might be a duck!

[solarwindspirit]

What is all the interest in the moon for now? Many moons ago I know the US government wanted to bomb the moon to cause panic and mass hysteria or fear.

hmmm. . .I believe from what I've read (with the amount of disinformation who knows what is true) The only UFO's seem to be a type of atmosphere on the moon. British had noted lightening on the moon. US has noted 'lights'...with clouds ranging different colors. . .In other words an atmosphere. . .

The moon could shield the earth from kinetic energy such as meteors toward earth. (who knows do we really have a moon?)

Anyway. . .to bomb it . . to find out if there is water on it is absurb!? And I think it's hallow. I think most planets are hallow.

Anyway it was my understanding that there was already a german/japanese base on it? (oh, that's just for the need to know exclusive club) However, this must be a military operation. And the US under Bush administration wanted to start preparing the surface of the moon for a base. *to make it habitable in at least twenty years

(hmmm it would be interesting to know just how large the moon really is. . .I've heard of different ways to find the measurements of it. . .I think it to be a lot larger than originally presumed.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb7tZ0EHpJY


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0BifYPQQJE&feature=related

[kingmonkey]

And the US under Bush administration wanted to start preparing the surface of the moon for a base. *to make it habitable in at least twenty years

That's what they're doing this for now; finding water would be the first step to colonizing the moon. It's not just the Bush administration/army, the whole scientific community are behind it.

[kingmonkey]

You may be right kingmonkey, that shooting this satelite into the Moon will do absolutely nothing to the Earth as a result and the dead-lifeless crater NASA claims they are shooting at as well, but if you have seen Moon Rising at TBLN Films for Free online, one can logically and simply concur that it aint just craters up there based on the evidence that is put forth throughout the film.

I have seen most of what's in the film and will watch it later when I have time...I admit there are some anomalous things going on up there, but I'm not sure that they are what they appear to be. I wasn't questioning this though, I was just questioning the nuclear bomb claim and the dangers it allegedly presented to the moon.

I will watch the video though; it's a while since I've seen the info in it.

[diky]

Your excused.... You are also welcomed to your skepticism even though you may have not considered that it doesn't cost you a penny to vote and its completely free to watch any of TBLN films online. Yes, I do want people to know they can enjoy TBLN films for free online but this Moon campaign is a serious matter to me and my people. Jose has recieved over 50 million views on his first UFO film online since 2002, so marketing and advertisement is not my purpose for this topic when there are millions of people who already know about TBLN and the films we make...



thanks

can you let us know when you are going to present the results to NASA, The Asssociated Press and the United Nations (and let us know their response)

[jamesc]

This non explosive impactor they are projecting into the moon at twice the speed of a bullet is suspicious to me any way. The point here i think is that it all comes down to ,DO YOU TRUST NASA ,WHY DO I THINK OR SAY THAT?They have in the past lied, dodged questions, remained silent on anomalies found on some of their photos from the Moon and Mars.Are they telling the truth about a NON EXPLOSIVE IMPACTOR??, Who is to say that this is what they want people to think that this impactor is NO EXPLOSIVE.For me its all about TRUST and acountability on PAST records and reactions from NASA.Does one trust a person or organisation that has in the past lied and covered up things??? WHAT WOULD YOU DO, TRUST OR NOT???:cool: Could NASA get away with impacting the chosen moon area with EXPLOSIVE impactor , as it says on their web site ,"STAND BACK FOR AN AWESOME DISPLAY OF FIREWORKS WHEN THE IMPACTOR HITS THE MOON".Could this impact disguise an actual explosive impact.:confused::cool:

[777equals666]

thanks

can you let us know when you are going to present the results to NASA, The Asssociated Press and the United Nations (and let us know their response)

You have my promise diky. I will publize the votes on this website, local and national media outlets as well as the above mentioned. Thank you! :D

[kingmonkey]

Could this impact disguise an actual explosive impact.:confused::cool:

I doubt it; there wouldn't be room for a bomb in the payload. A bomb big enough to cause any considerable damage would be the same size as the part of the rocket that breaks away. Plus there's the question of aim. The impactor is a relatively small object with no particular target apart from the crater itself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-GXjR_CZSE

[padirishjun]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5noZ-SQc0g&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmOnO6awOUk&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ggc1-jB2lhQ&feature=player_embedded

This is a real and factual event which can have repercussions that will effect all inhabitants on Earth in a very bad way if NASA goes through with this "experiment". NASA wants to officially bomb the Moon on Octo

PLEASE VISIT:

TBLN Films (http://www.tblnfilms.com)

and Vote "NO" for NASA exploding a Missle on the Moon.


Source information:

NASA's mission to bomb the Moon: Scientific American (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasas-mission-to-bomb-the-moon-2009-06)

NASA Launches Lunar Rocket (http://www.fox11online.com/dpp/news/scitech/space/news_wluk_cape_canaveral_nasa_launches_lunar_rocke t_200906190717_rev1)

Sorry for my ignorance,but could some body please explain to me why a missile launched on the 19th june,would take till the 9th october to reach the moon...after all it is only some 250,000 miles away.....however, it all seems highly suspicious and dubious to me,after all the information ive read from the like's of alex collier,richard hoagland,dan burisch etc etc...not saying i believe it all but interesting nonthless......

[elton]

Sorry for my ignorance,but could some body please explain to me why a missile launched on the 19th june,would take till the 9th october to reach the moon...after all it is only some 250,000 miles away.....however, it all seems highly suspicious and dubious to me,after all the information ive read from the like's of alex collier,richard hoagland,dan burisch etc etc...not saying i believe it all but interesting nonthless......


They sent it the wrong way so it has to make a big detour orbit back round the earth to get it back on track. If it does have a nuke on it then I hope they don't hit the Earth by mistake.

[777equals666]

Sorry for my ignorance,but could some body please explain to me why a missile launched on the 19th june,would take till the 9th october to reach the moon...after all it is only some 250,000 miles away.....however, it all seems highly suspicious and dubious to me,after all the information ive read from the like's of alex collier,richard hoagland,dan burisch etc etc...not saying i believe it all but interesting nonthless......

This satellite will be taking pictures of the Moon for the next couple months as well as doing other observations. On October 8th it will fire the missle portion of this satellite into a southern area near the pole of the Moon.

[kingmonkey]

Sorry for my ignorance,but could some body please explain to me why a missile launched on the 19th june,would take till the 9th october to reach the moon...after all it is only some 250,000 miles away.....however, it all seems highly suspicious and dubious to me,after all the information ive read from the like's of alex collier,richard hoagland,dan burisch etc etc...not saying i believe it all but interesting nonthless......


Because it has to do certain maneuvers and orbits to get where it's supposed to get...There are two different missions flying up on the same rocket; the LCROSS and the LRO. Getting near the moon is the easy part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-GXjR_CZSE
I'll ask an honest question and get a dishonest answer...How many people have actually gone to the effort and actually studied the "official" explanation? I bet most people have just gone straight to the conspiracy version. If so, you should ask yo self why.

[padirishjun]

This satellite will be taking pictures of the Moon for the next couple months as well as doing other observations. On October 8th it will fire the missle portion of this satellite into a southern area near the pole of the Moon.

Cheers to you and Kingmonkey for that info,makes a little more sense!!....i wasn't being "funny" or anything but was just genuinely confused about the facts.....and Kingmonkey,you're right if you was referring to me,maybe i haven't studied all the facts about this "project" and perhaps should,but i never insinuated that this was some sort of conspiracy as such..........

[jamesc]

Because it has to do certain maneuvers and orbits to get where it's supposed to get...There are two different missions flying up on the same rocket; the LCROSS and the LRO. Getting near the moon is the easy part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-GXjR_CZSE
I'll ask an honest question and get a dishonest answer...How many people have actually gone to the effort and actually studied the "official" explanation? I bet most people have just gone straight to the conspiracy version. If so, you should ask yo self why.

Because the official versions of things are not what they seem at times.Like in the past from NASA they have covered up,remain silent and lied about things in the past. I always read the 2 sides to every story but the question still remains WHY trust known liars??NASA=NEVER-A-STRAIGHT-ANSWER.:cool:Can you ask your self WHY it is NOT possible for NASA to lie AGAIN, WHY do you trust anything they say, official or not.?;)

[ozpixie]

Regardless of what they launch into the moon or why, I think it's wrong.

[elton]

Because the official versions of things are not what they seem at times.Like in the past from NASA they have covered up,remain silent and lied about things in the past. I always read the 2 sides to every story but the question still remains WHY trust known liars??NASA=NEVER-A-STRAIGHT-ANSWER.:cool:Can you ask your self WHY it is NOT possible for NASA to lie AGAIN, WHY do you trust anything they say, official or not.?;)


I agree with James. NASA are liars. They never went to the moon. They cover up Hoaglands work. And now they are launching nuclear bombs into the moon. When will you people wake up?

The LRO that is now (allegedly) in orbit round the moon is done in collaboration with Arizona State University so now they are poisoning the minds of academics with a new generation of fake moon photos. Wake up Arizona!

[jamesc]

Regardless of what they launch into the moon or why, I think it's wrong.

What bugs me about this is WHY did they not in the past try and do a controlled drilling of a section of the moons surface with astronauts:confused: .Surely if they landed men on the moon way back in the 60s with the technology they had back then compared to what they have today then WHY is this happening now and the way it is happening.???What reason is there to believe that the technology we possess today or not so far back is in any way inferior to what was available in the 60s/70s/80s/90/s and 2009??:confused: WHY now are they going about this in the way they are??:cool::confused::confused:

[elton]

What bugs me about this is WHY did they not in the past try and do a controlled drilling of a section of the moons surface with astronauts:confused: .Surely if they landed men on the moon way back in the 60s with the technology they had back then compared to what they have today then WHY is this happening now and the way it is happening.???What reason is there to believe that the technology we possess today or not so far back is in any way inferior to what was available in the 60s/70s/80s/90/s and 2009??:confused: WHY now are they going about this in the way they are??:cool::confused::confused:

See previous post. They didn't go to the moon in the first place. Its all fake and now they are dragging a University into the scam.