Ross comments from his book, UFOs and the Complete Evidence from
Space-
Both Jessup's The Expanding Case for the UFO and Firsoffs Strange
World of the Moon are difficult to find. The latter is even difficult
to read, unless you have an exceptional interest in geology,
astronomy, and technical science. But a study of these two books
would readily prove, that years later, NASA cleverly concealed the
truth about the Moon's environment. In the final analysis, NASA only
proved one thing for mankind - that it was technologically possible
for a spaceship to get to the Moon and back. A technological success
for man, but a formidable cover-up for mankind.
Formidable means difficult to surmount. Today it is unlikely that
even one person in a thousand believes that there could be life on
the Moon. Yet it is there. It has always been there. The government
knew it back in the 1950's, with the secret observatory studies.
Also, there is an atmosphere which moderates the climate and
temperature in certain regions, and one of sufficient density to
support vegetation. It is time to re-examine the early evidence of
selenography.
The Moon has its own unique time cycle. In 29.5 of our days, it has
essentially gone through a full season. Any longitudinal area will
have had about 14 continuous days of sunlight (timed by our clocks)
as the sun rises and sets, followed by another 14 days of night
darkness. Since the Moon's axis is nearly perpendicular to the plane
of the ecliptic, there are no different seasons, (no winter or
summer), only a monthly cycle.
The late Harvard professor W. H. Pickering photographed the effects
of an atmosphere during lunar occultations of Jupiter and Saturn. An
occultation refers to the temporary disappearance of a celestial body
as it passes behind a closer planet or moon. Separately, when the
planets were at the line of contact with the limb of the Moon and
partly covered, Pickering's negatives showed a clear, unmistakable
dark band crossing the disks of Jupiter and Saturn that measured 3
seconds of arc wide. In other words, the Moon's atmosphere extends 3
miles above its surface with sufficient density to provide a
photographic effect. This observation was also made by the expert
selenographers, Barnard and Douglas.
The Moon is a much smaller celestial body than Venus; its volume is
less than 3% of the size of our sister planet. Therefore the total
volume of atmosphere would be very reduced for the Moon. However, the
actual density near the surface could be comparatively high. Beyond
an altitude of 3 miles the atmospheric density around the Moon
appears to diminish rapidly, whereas on Venus the atmospheric range
is known to be many times more extensive. The air density 4 miles
above the Moon's surface might be equivalent to the air density 40
miles above the Venusian surface. Our presentday theories are
inadequate to explain the phenomena. The case for each and every
celestial body is dependent on its mass, volume, and actual surface
gravity. Since it will be shown that the Moon's gravity is 3 to 4
times higher than what has been commonly accepted, there is no simple
model or formula to predict each case. And until gravity is
absolutely understood, along with its precise relationship to a
planet's size and mass, it will not be possible to explain one
atmospheric situation in terms of another. To put it plainly, even if
the surface air density is known, it cannot be predicted what the
atmospheric range and corresponding altitude density would be, until
the intricate relationship of gravity to that celestial body is known.
Why is this important? Astronomers have always insisted that the
question of lunar atmosphere can be answered by the way in which
stars are "occulted" by the Moon. Since stars passing behind the rim
of the Moon appear to snap out instantaneously, astronomers readily
conclude that there must not be an atmosphere there. If there was a
gaseous layer, they say that the effect should be as obvious as the
case of a star occultation by Venus, where the extensive atmosphere
makes the star appear to flicker and fade briefly before disappearing
behind the rim of the planet. But Venus' atmosphere is much denser,
and the planet's size too massive, to compare the effects.
William Brian, a recent Moon researcher, suggests that a lunar
atmosphere would be very clean, due to the lack of high winds and
other weather conditions. Since the lunar atmosphere would not
generally be carrying dust and water vapor by surface winds, he
points out that light diffusion and scattering effects would be
minimal. Therefore the occultation of stars would not be as
pronounced, even if the Moon possessed a dense atmosphere.5
Firsoff writes in his book that he observed the occultation of two
stars in March 1957 while using a 6.5-inch reflector. Neither
star 'snapped out' at contact with the rim of the Moon, but dimmed
rapidly, then flickered brilliantly, before dimming again and finally
disappearing. At the time of observation the Moon was a narrow
crescent 2.5 days after the New Moon, and Firsoff stated that the
effect could not be seen at a fuller phase, probably due to the
background glare of the moonlit sky. Since we are dealing with
different conditions for the Moon, the observational results do not
come as easily as observing the Venusian atmosphere effects. This
instance seemed to be an excellent combination of timing, seeing
conditions, and most importantly - professional objectivity.
Indeed, Firsoff wrote that the observation was a clear and
unmistakable confirmation of a lunar atmosphere - that there is a
gaseous layer, low over the surface of the Moon. To this statement
can be added the evidence provided from a study by the American
Association of Lunar and Planetary Observers. This group of
independent astronomers catalogued dozens of observations of faint
meteors flashing near the Moon's surface. An atmosphere around the
Moon provided sufficient friction for these meteors to become
incandescent to earthbound observers.
Firsoff also recorded that he observed an auroral streamer near the
southern pole of the Moon in May 1955. His telescopic view showed a
dancing and sparkling glow, from which a faint beam of light suddenly
detached and shot up vertically into the lunar sky. As it ascended
the beam became more intense, while fading out at the base, and
finally disappearing. The length of the beam was estimated to be
nearly 100 miles, and the auroral display reminded him of the
colorful northern lights he had seen in Scotland, an effect that
certainly requires an atmosphere.
The lunar atmosphere could be tenuous and still account for these
various observations mentioned, as Firsoff pointed out. He took a
cautious approach at the time, which was probably reasonable, due to
the accepted gravitational theories of the day. However, other
discoveries suggested that basic assumptions about the Moon could be
fundamentally wrong, and that the strange lunar world might have many
surprises in store for us.
On July 22, 1954, Firsoff telescopically viewed the sunset on the
Moon's Apennines, a prominent mountain range bordering the Mare
Imbrium. Using different filters for comparison, he proved to himself
that sunset on the Moon was really red, an effect that other
astronomers had also observed. This was amazing to Firsoff, (he even
called it thrilling), for the reddening clearly indicated the
presence of a gaseous layer over the Moon containing water and carbon
dioxide molecules.
For the sun's light to become reddened, it has to pass through a
layer of gas of sufficient density. Noting that this is quite
conspicuous at sunrise and sunset on Earth, Firsoff explained that
the Moon's atmosphere shows the same positive reaction to sunlight at
the end of its day. This meant that the lunar air was dense enough to
hold water and C02 molecules.
Immediately following sunset, is twilight. There is a small time
interval before dark which we call twilight, when our atmosphere is
illuminated by the sun which has dropped below the horizon. Without
an atmosphere, there would be no period of twilight. As soon as the
sun dipped below the horizon, it would be totally dark (nighttime).