Interesting: Astronomers want observatory on the moon

That's a pretty lame justification, Ottomaton. "It's obvious, so why investigate?" is basically your supposition.

It is not obvious to me. It is not obvious to a large number of people who actually spend their lives researching this crap. Even professional satintel interpreters are at a loss to explain it. And as I said a number of former NASA officials have come out and said that there actually is a conspiracy going on that involves an alien civilization.

Why not send a probe up there and find out once and for all? NASA won't do it.

Just FYI, I am not totally convinced that there's some vast conspiracy to cover up alien inhabitance of Mars or the Moon. The Cydonia region might just be an incredible anomoly - my mind is not made up on that, because I don't have any insider info on it. No one does, unless they've already sent a probe there and didn't tell anyone about it.

I just don't see why they won't land a probe there and settle the question once and for all. They won't. That's that. We'll never know.

 

A quick web search for 'Cydonia conspiracy' turns up this web page, entitled James Cameron, Mars and 33 degrees, about how James cameron is a 33 degree Freemason, using MK-Ultra mind control techniques developed by the CIA which are embeded in his movies in order to encourage public intrest in exploring Mars at the behest of some dude named Dr. Donald Ewen Cameron who pioneered basic mind control techniques while preforming experiments on concentration camp survivors when with the British OSS.

Concurent to this Cameron, in conjunction with the Freemasons, is embarking on a public campaign to debunk Cydonia in order to reduce public fear of the aliens that Cameron & Co. know are there. Really. I'm not making this up.

Mr. treeman, I realise that this man is not you. I know you'd never belive this kind of thing as you seem to have atleast a toehold in reality. I'm just pointing out that this is the type of person with whom your position is aligned.

I find it hard to integrate this treeman with the treeman who was unable to make the leap of faith to Hayes Street's supositions about Somalia. The two don't seem to mesh.

 

otto -- but you're taking an extreme and counting it for the whole...it seems that treeman is saying he's not sure what's up there, but he's mildly concerned that nasa won't go find out..particularly since there are those within nasa who believe it's worth taking a look at. to throw that in with the james cameron stuff is to attempt to make a position look entirely absurd, when, in at it's core, it is not.

 

The other thing that disturbs me about these things: While I'll grant you that these things look intresting, every time I watch the Discovery-Wings channel I turn on some show about U-2's, spies, and such. These shows remind me that there are people unlike me who have lots of experience in intrerpreting aerial photos. What looks to me like a lump of green beans turns out to be proof that the Cubans have balistic nuclear weapons.

The people making these claims have absolutely no qualifications for aerial photography interpritation. Usualy, they have some sort of advanced degree in physics in some totaly unrelated field. Neverthelesss, they sort of 'grab on' to the theory and once they're locked in they won't let go.

If they'd just approach these things without being so totaly sure of themselves in some field in which they have absolutely no expertiese, and in which the evidence is limited at best I might be more inclined to believe them.

 

Ottomaton:

I really, truly, could not care less what a film maker does to promote his movies. I really couldn't. That is beautiful capitalism at its best, and I will leave it alone and let it work its magic. Maybe we'll get a realistic movie out of it.

My "position" is that it is possible that there are formations in Cydonia that are not natural. I am not alone with motivated filmmakers on that assumption; there are a good number of actual scientists and satintel interpreters who share that "position". I myself am not set either way, but I am inclined to believe that they are not natural by virtue of geometry and concentration - two ways our own cities set themselves apart from the countrysides they reside in.

I'm a bit curious about why you are so quick to dismiss that possibility? What makes you so sure - aside from the "obviousness" of it?

And what was that about the Somalia/HayesStreet thread? What are you talking about?

 

When someone brought up to John Ashcroft the accusation by some Arabs that the US' video tape of OBL cheering the terrorists was a forged fake designed to discredit the true hero, his reply was, more or less, 'That is ridiculous. Next Question.' Why was this his answer, as opposed by a call for a multi-million dollar public investigation in order to prove to those that didn't believe?





...look, if you want whacko gov't conspiracies, look to those that do exist. Things like eschelon, omnivore, or tempest. This one just isn't based enough documentable fact.

 

They're called Sattelite Intelligence Interpreters. And a large number of them don't know what to make of Cydonia. It's not just amateurs like you an me looking at an aerial photograph; it's trained people who look at it and say "Well, that doesn't look right", or "That shouldn't be there"... Geologists as well. The rock formations don't look natural (Mars weathering could not produce some of them), and the right angles and straight lines look especially out of place for natural formations.

 

Pictures don't lie. There is no better documented fact than a NASA photo (the Cydonia picture I posted is a NASA photo).

Pictures don't lie. They can only be misinterpreted, and then usually only by someone who wants to misinterpret them.

 

It could be true. You could be right. But until you present me with enough coroborating evidence, I don't accept that it is worth expending the effort to examine it.

Hell, the 'Cameron' guy could be right. But the evidence just isn't there. Present me with something compelling and I'm there. Find the pyramid shaped objects intresting but, given that I'm not an expert in extraterestrial geophysics, and every year they come up with more and more new and intresting bizare physics in the solar system. Things like volcanic techtonics on Jovian moons caused by magnetic fields. Nobody has any definate idea how things like Olympus Mons was created, or why Phobos and Demos are shaped like little potatos. The solar system is full of strange wonders and up to now, every one that has been explained was the result of the vast and wonderous natural universe, not alien inteligence. If none of the wacky stuff that's come before has been the result of an aliens, why should I, until you provide more evidence for than against, should I belive that this is.

To quote Mr. Hamlet:

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

 

A picture can tell a thousand lies.

 

Fine. Just don't tell me those are definately alien houses, and NASA knows it, but is covering it up.

 

Do you even understand that this is the very logical fallacy that NASA is making right now???

"I won't believe you until you come at me with more proof." (up-close pictures of Cydonia)

"I won't give you access to proof" (a probe to Cydonia - NASA won't send it)

"Therefore there is no proof" (no up-close pictures)

Of course there can be no "proof" until NASA sends a probe. But they won't, and they cite a lack of proof as reason not to send a probe...

You're an intelligent person, Ottomaton. Surely you see the logical dilemma here? And that the only way to solve the problem is to send a probe to the region? There can be no other way.

 

It can also tell a singular truth. What we need is a closer look...

This is too important a question for NASA to just brush off. We won't know either way without a better picture.

 

Perhaps it's an economic issue why they won't send a probe. After all, sending something to mars is rather costly. It's already been mentioned the NASA head is tightwad and the economy isn't doing that well overall. Also, space missions aren't exactly planned overnight, and I'm sure NASA has already scheduled and invested a lot of resources in other missions for the next few years.

If people got alarmed at everthing that NASA didn't explore, there would be a lot of freaked out people.

 

Wow! An observatory on the moon! Woohoo!! Does this mean more pictures of Earth from outerspace?

Seriously though, the architectual design and actual building of the observatory will be interesting to see.