[NightMoon]

This is a really quaint idea. Trees on the moon. Like the moon is made of cheese.

[TALM]

Moonie2012, on 29 October 2009 - 03:16 PM, said:

Except he wasn't. It was 1921, for pete's sake. Compared to what we know about the moon now, we knew NOTHING back then.

If you keep going down this ludicrous plants-on-the-moon road you're just going to take another fall, like the several you have taken in the past.

That is a well thought out response. Thanks for taking the time to voice it.

It was 1921 yes.............But really, you shouldn't discredit this man based on what year it was.

This man knew quite a lot about the Moon.

For instance, look at who employed him at the time of his research. Are you actually saying this man knew nothing?

All you seem to be going by is NASA's deception and the deception of every other nation who has taken close up photos of the Moon.

I believe that you personally don't know more than what you have been taught. I mean, that would be a fair asumption right?

That is of unless of course you have been there your self.

Well...................Have you?

This post has been edited by TALM: 29 October 2009 - 03:18 PM

[Sweetpumper]

[TALM]

Sweetpumper, on 29 October 2009 - 03:52 PM, said:

There is no vegetation on the moon.

Correct............think fungus.

[Moonie2012]

TALM, on 29 October 2009 - 10:15 AM, said:

That is of unless of course you have been there your self.

Well...................Have you?

No. However, your posts seem to reflect that you have.

Well...................Have you? Have you strolled among these moon trees? Have you smelled the moon flowers? Did you dance with the moon squid and watch the fleet of UFOs fly over?

I believe that you personally don't know more than what you have been taught. I mean, that would be a fair assumption right (other than what you think you see on your flawed moon photo scans, that is)?

Coordinated deception about moon plants from every nation on Earth, what a farce. You sound like those morons who argue that the Earth is flat and we're all being lied to by those same nations. I can understand the thoughts behind hiding UFOs, but hiding moon plants? Pointless, imbecilic, and nigh impossible to hide.

This post has been edited by Moonie2012: 29 October 2009 - 03:32 PM

[TRUEYOUTRUEME]

Actually I was thinking that it was those people who continually fought against most new views or discoveries who insisted things like the earth was flat, etc…. it is no surprise that people here seem to have a extreme negative reaction to being told that what they believe about the moon may be wrong.

[Moonie2012]

TRUEYOUTRUEME, on 29 October 2009 - 10:34 AM, said:

Actually I was thinking that it was those people who continually fought against most new views or discoveries who insisted things like the earth was flat, etc…. it is no surprise that people here seem to have a extreme negative reaction to being told that what they believe about the moon may be wrong.

One guy (outdated Mr. 1921 aside) who has no formal training about the moon, moon photography, satellite imaging or anything like that trying to tell us that there are plants on the moon (using nothing but unsourced bad photos and scans that he found in a trunk that have been shown to be loaded with flaws) does not constitute a threatening "new discovery".

This post has been edited by Moonie2012: 29 October 2009 - 03:50 PM

[Sweetpumper]

You may be right.

[InsideOut]

TALM, on 29 October 2009 - 01:25 PM, said:

Well, I wasnt there when and if the Russian rovers cruised around, so in all honestly I wouldn't know. The Profesor in the article I posted the link to says he had identified three types of growth, so for all I know, the Russians could have seen any of the three. That is unless they expanded their base of operatios out side a five mile perameter.

"If?"

Quote

Lunokhod 2 continues to be detected by lunar laser ranging experiments and its position is known to sub-meter accuracy.

"Five mile perameter?" Oh dear...

Quote

During its 322 Earth days of operations, Lunokhod 1 traveled 10.5 km and returned more than 20,000 TV images and 206 high-resolution panoramas. In addition, it performed twenty-five soil analyses with its RIFMA x-ray fluorescence spectrometer and used its penetrometer at 500 different locations.
Lunokhod 2 operated for about 4 months, covered 37 km (23 miles) of terrain, including hilly upland areas and rilles, and currently holds the record for longest distance of surface travel of any extraterrestrial vehicle.[3] It sent back 86 panoramic images and over 80,000 TV pictures. Many mechanical tests of the surface, laser ranging measurements, and other experiments were completed during this time.

Further actual facts

[TALM]

Moonie2012, on 29 October 2009 - 04:44 PM, said:

One guy (outdated Mr. 1921 aside) who has no formal training about the moon, moon photography, satellite imaging or anything like that trying to tell us that there are plants on the moon (using nothing but unsourced bad photos and scans that he found in a trunk that have been shown to be loaded with flaws) does not constitute a threatening "new discovery".

While I am disapointed in you, I am not amazed. You seem to be slinging a lot of unfounded false claims while not really knowing of which you speak. But as I said, I am not amazed. While you know nothing about the photo's in my collection, it seems you might be refering to threads I have posted that focus on different photo's from different missions. It's disappointing that you would assume my photo's are flawed based on unfounded speculation. But really, I come to expect this from you.

While I appreciate your effort here to attempt to add your viewpoint, I find it disheartening that you liken me to a "moron" and still retain your posting priveleges. If you would take the time to go back and read, you will find that this thread is not about me, but rather the research of another person.

This post has been edited by TALM: 29 October 2009 - 04:14 PM

[TALM]

InsideOut, on 29 October 2009 - 05:01 PM, said:

"If?"


"Five mile perameter?" Oh dear...



Further actual facts

Trust me when I say, that I find my claims seeminly absurd, and I know where your coming from.

I just find this mans work rather in depth, and the guy knew what he was talking about.

Of course if a person here has never been exposed to the truth, I firmly see how both the Mr. 1921 and I seem insane.

This post has been edited by TALM: 29 October 2009 - 04:15 PM

[thefinalfrontier]

To be completely honest here, I dont even know why anyone is enertaining this thread,

There is NOT any vegetation on the moon plants or otherwise,

[Sweetpumper]

thefinalfrontier, on 29 October 2009 - 05:14 PM, said:

There is NOT any vegetation on the moon plants or otherwise,

We know.

[thefinalfrontier]

Sweetpumper, on 29 October 2009 - 12:18 PM, said:

We know.

At you pumper,

[747400]

TALM, on 29 October 2009 - 03:15 PM, said:

All you seem to be going by is NASA's deception and the deception of every other nation who has taken close up photos of the Moon.

Oh no, not that line of reasoning again.

Why would they do that? Why would, say, China or Russia (particularly Russia in the 1960s) want to go along with NASA's deception?

Isn't the all-purpose vast universal conspiracy such a handy excuse.