• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

More Moon Stuff

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

In 2004 George W. Bush talked about returning to the Moon by 2020. Split that 16 year difference in half and we aren't one inch closer to returning to the lunar landscape. China, India and Russia are all making noises about going to the Moon. The USA, pathetically, is being left in the dust. I guess we will see what transpires if one of these other countries makes it there before us.
 
Remember that we have legislators with a "cut everything" approach, so don't expect much to change in the USA until those legislators are voted out with extreme prejudice. Or unless private industry can move things along a little faster.
 
Decker said:
I have never made a secret that my thinking about why we quit our moon program was that it was made known to NASA that "we" were not welcome there. Look at what the public plans were and were being discussed in the mid to later 1960's. We were discussing lunar bases, manufacturing facilities on the lunar surface, etc. and etc. After 6 missions landed, that was it. We still had missions ready to go and the equip. was built and the astronauts were trained and named and suddenly ... NADA! After December of 1972 it was as if we RETRACTED the space program. Oh, we flew Skylab, we flew it in low earth orbit but that was it. I was always suspicious of why and NASA's explanation that the "public lost interest" always struck me as the most blatant bullshit. After George Leonard's book, "Somebody Else Is On the Moon" came out .. then damned near disappeared as quickly as it came out, the reason we may have left became very clear to me. I lived through the 60's and remember a lot of chatter about the moon prior to our landing there. The mysterious moving "domes" were discussed, lights flaring up in craters and the NASA report TR-277 all discussed mysterious items about the moon that were evident going back hundreds of years. If China goes up and lands then that should prove interesting.

Decker
Click to expand...

Funny, i made the exact same point to my wife last night as we looked at the full moon.
I agree 100 percent, and its a topic i often explore personally.

I like to start with an acceptance of the premise ie "somebody else is on the moon" and "we are not welcome"

And then canvass the "whys"

The first one that comes to mind is "stay down there until you learn to stop killing each others children"
 
Or, let's just wait until 'they(that'd be us ;) )' wipe themselves out so we can safely use this planet for our purposes as well (so many theories concerning the moon (and not only the dark side..)), but will we ever know ?There is something there, by now someone needs to convince me otherwise. No manned moon missions since 1969 ? Are you frigging kidding me?

No one's winning in this field, it's so utterly frustrating and fascinating at the same time...
 
Sorry for this one, but that's the only one I know of.

how-to-draw-pink-floyd-dark-side-of-the-moon_1_000000002854_5.jpg
 
Notice how everyone ignored my question: What are the first and third photographs alleged to show that is unusual?

I am not suggesting there's nothing anamolous happening on the moon. Far from it. It find it just as unusual as anyone else that, contrary to what one would expect, our activities on the moon dropped to nearly zero after the Apollo projects, rather than substantially increasing as one would expect to have happened.

However, these pictures certainly cannot function as any kind of evidence of anything bizarre happening on the moon with regard to alien or UFO related activities. Particularly with the first and third pictures, there's nothing but a bunch of rocks here. Towers? Structures? Machines? There's nothing that even remotely looks like any of these.

I am not trolling, which I know I will be accused of. I care about the truth.
 
Chuckleberryfinn said:
Notice how everyone ignored my question: What are the first and third photographs alleged to show that is unusual?
I am not trolling, which I know I will be accused of. I care about the truth.
Click to expand...

I do not know what photographs you refer to. Please be a bit more specific.

Decker
 
Chuckleberryfinn said:
DMR Lunar 1 and 3, as seen in your article here, Mr. Ecker:

Don Ecker’s moon quest | STARpod US
Click to expand...

Oh, okay. I got you now.

In photograph number 1, along the rim of the crater it appears that "unnatural" excavation is/was occurring. Also in photograph number 1, just below "1:00 o'clock" as you look inside the crater you will also find, and an arrow pointing at it, one of George Leonard's "infamous X drones." Or what looks like it in any case.

Actually photograph number 3 (in my very own humble opinion) is one of the most amazing public lunar photos ever. In this photograph you see two objects, one larger and a smaller one above the larger object, rolling across the lunar plane leaving behind them ... tread marks in the lunar dust/dirt. When you examine the tread marks they resemble the same type of track that armored vehicles leave here on Earth. I find this photograph absolutely amazing. I hope this answers your question.

Decker
 
The one with the treads is pretty bizarre. It's Photograph number 2 on your article. I left it out because it is unexplainable, at least by me, but perhaps not by someone else more familiar with the physical processes which can generate such a thing.

I don't see anything unusual in the others, however. I think the case would be stronger without the two besides the track photograph included.
 
Oops, my bad. I did not go down to what you called the 3rd photograph. That is a photo of "Kings Crater" and because it is so small on the site, you can not see the oddities. Believe me Chuckleberry, there are a bunch of them there. For example, in the upper left corner when you zoom in there are several that could blow your mind. One is what appears to be a building with two lit windows. Beside the "building" is what appears to be an artificial tower. Below that near mid photograph is another "mind blower" in what appears to be a satellite dish, looking at it from the rear. As a matter of fact back in Feb. of 2001 I was a guest on the old Art Bell Coast to Coast show speaking about these lunar mysteries. This was one I sent Bell and he at first claimed he couldn't see what I was talking about. However when his eyes adjusted he did see it and expressed amazement. FWIW.

Decker
 
Decker said:
Oops, my bad. I did not go down to what you called the 3rd photograph. That is a photo of "Kings Crater" and because it is so small on the site, you can not see the oddities. Believe me Chuckleberry, there are a bunch of them there. For example, in the upper left corner when you zoom in there are several that could blow your mind. One is what appears to be a building with two lit windows. Beside the "building" is what appears to be an artificial tower. Below that near mid photograph is another "mind blower" in what appears to be a satellite dish, looking at it from the rear. As a matter of fact back in Feb. of 2001 I was a guest on the old Art Bell Coast to Coast show speaking about these lunar mysteries. This was one I sent Bell and he at first claimed he couldn't see what I was talking about. However when his eyes adjusted he did see it and expressed amazement. FWIW.

Decker
Click to expand...


Yes Don, the Art Bell piece with you is class because more than him eventually seeing something strange after bemoaning it all being pictures of 'rocks' - you can see that instantly his whole tone changes from what to me may have been, 'I think Don Ecker is a little nutty and thinks he sees pictures of weird artificial objects on the moon' which instantly becomes 'Oh you can? You can see it, wow etc' once his eyes adjust to the picture.

Because we are looking at non-everyday objects in a non-everyday setting, add to that the lack of colour as a visual reference too, and it's understandable that even when pointed directly at something on one of these pics, it can still take a moment for the brain to adjust and actually pick out structures that are there. Once you see them, the few I've seen, it's almost impossible to go back to the innocent person before for who all the pictures just looked like moonscape pure and simple. You can't put the visual genie back into the bottle.
 
I need to trawl the web and download that Art Bell episode with you on Don. This stuff blows my mind. BTW Buzz Aldrin was on The Nerdist podcast recently and talked a lot about his time in space, and revealed why he thinks its better for us NOT to return to the Moon and to concentrate on going to Mars ( BACK to Mars, I don't know..but if we've been THERE before..he didn't let it slip this time ) PS. By far one of your best ever episodes of Dark Matters Radio has to be the Vito Saccheri episode. Just for sheer edge of the seat revelations!!
 
Back
Top