<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Water on the Moon: A Conspiracy?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/</link>
	<description>From Aviation to Space Exploration, it&#039;s all in it...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Nov 2011 17:21:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-229</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 01:40:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-229</guid>
		<description>Der... I don&#039;t get it?  Why would they be saying that the discovery of water on the moon is a conspiracy when the conspiracy theorists that I know of have all been saying that it WAS there to begin with?  Of course there is water on the moon.  Many research theorists like myself have been saying this about the moon, mars and a few select other planets and moons for years.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Der&#8230; I don&#8217;t get it?  Why would they be saying that the discovery of water on the moon is a conspiracy when the conspiracy theorists that I know of have all been saying that it WAS there to begin with?  Of course there is water on the moon.  Many research theorists like myself have been saying this about the moon, mars and a few select other planets and moons for years.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mamta</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-141</link>
		<dc:creator>mamta</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2009 20:48:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-141</guid>
		<description>Well! The article was a nice read but a more pessimistic one. OK ! let me start..

The Moon Impact Probe on Chandrayaan-I had sensed water 10 months before than Nasa&#039;s Moon Minerolgy Mapper (M3) but protocol did not allow ISRO to declare the discovery......it shows CHANDRAYAAN was a success in it&#039;s own way.The reason ISRO scientists referred the Impacter data to NASA scientists is because the real knowledge base of analyzing lunar data exists with USA, Russia and some European countries. India has limited experience with space science data. We are great in space technology and applications, which were our focus. Space Science (i.e. basic science on items in space) is very limited. So it was wise to refer it to real experts instead of making it a mockery by rushing to media,otherwise India could have easily stole the glory of Finding water on moon much before anyone.

The discovery of water on the Moon is not quick and sudden , there came a news report 40 years ago when the moon rock samples brought down to earth by Americans showed traces of water molecules most scientists ignored it and they concluded that it is some contamination which might have occurred in handling.

So in the end , i would like to put forward that is NASA is not fishing for some cheap publicity and praise but it along with India&#039;s Chandrayan mission have proved the findings of existence of water on moon. 

I KNOW  THE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THE ARTICLE ARE NOT OF AUTHOR&#039;S AND NEITHER AM I MAKING ANY STATEMENT ON HIM ,MY VIEWS ARE MEANT FOR THE CRITICS .

thank you</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well! The article was a nice read but a more pessimistic one. OK ! let me start..</p>
<p>The Moon Impact Probe on Chandrayaan-I had sensed water 10 months before than Nasa&#8217;s Moon Minerolgy Mapper (M3) but protocol did not allow ISRO to declare the discovery&#8230;&#8230;it shows CHANDRAYAAN was a success in it&#8217;s own way.The reason ISRO scientists referred the Impacter data to NASA scientists is because the real knowledge base of analyzing lunar data exists with USA, Russia and some European countries. India has limited experience with space science data. We are great in space technology and applications, which were our focus. Space Science (i.e. basic science on items in space) is very limited. So it was wise to refer it to real experts instead of making it a mockery by rushing to media,otherwise India could have easily stole the glory of Finding water on moon much before anyone.</p>
<p>The discovery of water on the Moon is not quick and sudden , there came a news report 40 years ago when the moon rock samples brought down to earth by Americans showed traces of water molecules most scientists ignored it and they concluded that it is some contamination which might have occurred in handling.</p>
<p>So in the end , i would like to put forward that is NASA is not fishing for some cheap publicity and praise but it along with India&#8217;s Chandrayan mission have proved the findings of existence of water on moon. </p>
<p>I KNOW  THE VIEWS EXPRESSED IN THE ARTICLE ARE NOT OF AUTHOR&#8217;S AND NEITHER AM I MAKING ANY STATEMENT ON HIM ,MY VIEWS ARE MEANT FOR THE CRITICS .</p>
<p>thank you</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Assad</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-88</link>
		<dc:creator>Assad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:04:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-88</guid>
		<description>@Frapster

yea already know abt the probes which discovered the traces of water.. i mentioned in my previous PRO MOON WATER DISCOVERY article
http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/24/water-on-moon-confirmed/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Frapster</p>
<p>yea already know abt the probes which discovered the traces of water.. i mentioned in my previous PRO MOON WATER DISCOVERY article<br />
<a href="http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/24/water-on-moon-confirmed/" rel="nofollow">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/24/water-on-moon-confirmed/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Frapster</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-87</link>
		<dc:creator>Frapster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:22:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-87</guid>
		<description>You specifically claim that past data does not support water on the Moon.

This is wrong. Its either a lie or you didn&#039;t actually check.

The latest results were in fact confirmed by going over old data from Cassini in &#039;99, the Deep Impact probe and even validates the water that actually WAS discovered in Apollo samples, but was, at the time, disregarded as local contamination.

Basically, because everyone assumed that the Moon must be dry (like here), individuals seeing these results disregarded them as contamination, instruments that weren&#039;t fully outgassed, and anamolies.

What happened today was that someone bothered to go back and look at everything in context.

These kinds of discoveries from old data are not unprecedented and in fact happen all the time.

Meanwhile, there is the idea that NASA is pumping a Moon mission. This is nonsense; NASA hates the Moon. Loath it.

NASA took the Vision for Space Exploration, tossed out all the stuff about lunar resource utilization and basically designed rockets to accomplish Apollo on Mars, claiming its for a Moon mission.

NASA is obsessed with Mars, at the expense of the Moon.

If there&#039;s a conspiracy at all, its NASA sitting on data to avoid people thinking the Moon doesn&#039;t suck.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You specifically claim that past data does not support water on the Moon.</p>
<p>This is wrong. Its either a lie or you didn&#8217;t actually check.</p>
<p>The latest results were in fact confirmed by going over old data from Cassini in &#8217;99, the Deep Impact probe and even validates the water that actually WAS discovered in Apollo samples, but was, at the time, disregarded as local contamination.</p>
<p>Basically, because everyone assumed that the Moon must be dry (like here), individuals seeing these results disregarded them as contamination, instruments that weren&#8217;t fully outgassed, and anamolies.</p>
<p>What happened today was that someone bothered to go back and look at everything in context.</p>
<p>These kinds of discoveries from old data are not unprecedented and in fact happen all the time.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, there is the idea that NASA is pumping a Moon mission. This is nonsense; NASA hates the Moon. Loath it.</p>
<p>NASA took the Vision for Space Exploration, tossed out all the stuff about lunar resource utilization and basically designed rockets to accomplish Apollo on Mars, claiming its for a Moon mission.</p>
<p>NASA is obsessed with Mars, at the expense of the Moon.</p>
<p>If there&#8217;s a conspiracy at all, its NASA sitting on data to avoid people thinking the Moon doesn&#8217;t suck.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-86</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 23:06:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-86</guid>
		<description>At the very least, you should have shown how the conspiracy theorist point of view here is wrong instead of just voicing their opinions for them. The uninformed layman may walk into this site, read this article, and be duped into believing that the discovery of water on the moon truly is a conspiracy.

While you claim that you don&#039;t believe that it&#039;s a conspiracy, your article does little to suggest it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>At the very least, you should have shown how the conspiracy theorist point of view here is wrong instead of just voicing their opinions for them. The uninformed layman may walk into this site, read this article, and be duped into believing that the discovery of water on the moon truly is a conspiracy.</p>
<p>While you claim that you don&#8217;t believe that it&#8217;s a conspiracy, your article does little to suggest it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-85</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:31:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-85</guid>
		<description>I have read it, and I did see the line where it claims to be from a critics point of view. 

&quot;The news of water being discovered on moon has pumped NASA to boost their Constellation Program.&quot;
Really? In just the past few days?

&quot;But still there are people who think these findings are bogus and a hoax, and that water cannot exist on moon.&quot;
I haven&#039;t seen anyone claiming this, but I would not be surprised. Why are you giving attention to their point of view? The last thing conspiracy nuts need is the attention they crave to further their agendas.

When you start out your story in the usual conspiracy style (i.e. no facts, loosely based assumptions), and go to sites such as Space.com, and advertise this article as if you truly believe in the conspiracy, then it cries out to the readers that you truly believe this is a conspiracy. You may claim to not think it&#039;s a conspiracy, but you are not acting like it.

If I may make a suggestion, very first line: &quot;Note: The author of this article does NOT believe in the conspiracy mentioned below.&quot; Maybe it make it in bold red font or something. Just so we&#039;re clear what side of the fence you&#039;re on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have read it, and I did see the line where it claims to be from a critics point of view. </p>
<p>&#8220;The news of water being discovered on moon has pumped NASA to boost their Constellation Program.&#8221;<br />
Really? In just the past few days?</p>
<p>&#8220;But still there are people who think these findings are bogus and a hoax, and that water cannot exist on moon.&#8221;<br />
I haven&#8217;t seen anyone claiming this, but I would not be surprised. Why are you giving attention to their point of view? The last thing conspiracy nuts need is the attention they crave to further their agendas.</p>
<p>When you start out your story in the usual conspiracy style (i.e. no facts, loosely based assumptions), and go to sites such as Space.com, and advertise this article as if you truly believe in the conspiracy, then it cries out to the readers that you truly believe this is a conspiracy. You may claim to not think it&#8217;s a conspiracy, but you are not acting like it.</p>
<p>If I may make a suggestion, very first line: &#8220;Note: The author of this article does NOT believe in the conspiracy mentioned below.&#8221; Maybe it make it in bold red font or something. Just so we&#8217;re clear what side of the fence you&#8217;re on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Assad</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-84</link>
		<dc:creator>Assad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:14:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-84</guid>
		<description>@ Thomas
This article is from critics point of view and not me.. read it carefully</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Thomas<br />
This article is from critics point of view and not me.. read it carefully</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Assad</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-83</link>
		<dc:creator>Assad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 22:10:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-83</guid>
		<description>People who are reading this...I want to make it CLEAR  THAT THIS ARTICLE IS FROM CRITICS POINT OF VIEW AND NOT ME!!!... I know the facts and I totally agree with findings and the discovery of water .

I AM getting foolish comments that im criticising.. let me tell the ppl who think this ; i have come across many ppl who wont believe the existance of water so i wrote down wht ppl think thats it.. SO IT&quot;S NOT ME WHO IS CRITICIZING !!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People who are reading this&#8230;I want to make it CLEAR  THAT THIS ARTICLE IS FROM CRITICS POINT OF VIEW AND NOT ME!!!&#8230; I know the facts and I totally agree with findings and the discovery of water .</p>
<p>I AM getting foolish comments that im criticising.. let me tell the ppl who think this ; i have come across many ppl who wont believe the existance of water so i wrote down wht ppl think thats it.. SO IT&#8221;S NOT ME WHO IS CRITICIZING !!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-82</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:52:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-82</guid>
		<description>The discovery of water on the Moon did not come out of no where. It has been hinted at for the past decade from Clementine data, and if I&#039;m not mistaken, Lunar Prospector. This is confirmation of what has been suspected, not an &quot;out of nowhere&quot; discovery.

The suspicions of water on the moon were made public, and nothing has been hidden. There is no conspiracy.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The discovery of water on the Moon did not come out of no where. It has been hinted at for the past decade from Clementine data, and if I&#8217;m not mistaken, Lunar Prospector. This is confirmation of what has been suspected, not an &#8220;out of nowhere&#8221; discovery.</p>
<p>The suspicions of water on the moon were made public, and nothing has been hidden. There is no conspiracy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Buzzi</title>
		<link>http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/comment-page-1/#comment-78</link>
		<dc:creator>Buzzi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:53:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://astroaviator.com/2009/09/28/water-on-the-moon-a-conspiracy/#comment-78</guid>
		<description>OMG....dude Obama is gonna scrap the program for sure..it&#039;s too expensive!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OMG&#8230;.dude Obama is gonna scrap the program for sure..it&#8217;s too expensive!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

