Strange Area In Photograph

a reply to: ArMaP

Sorry mate I cant unlearn this truth and nothing will ever change my mind because this is what they did to fool us all.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Probably came off a shuttle trip. What else do you see? I ask because I don't see anything else.

originally posted by: lunarrover
a reply to: Jefferton

I imagined this...

files.abovetopsecret.com...

Those look like pelts from meteorites.

originally posted by: ArMaP
I'm not a professional

Then why do you choose to speak as if you are an authority on digital imaging and scanning?

Now I have found this along with the rest of the evidence I have accumulated there is absolutely no way on earth that I can ever believe a thing NASA say, whats more it's ridiculous the lies are being protected by ordinary people?

It just does not make any sense.

originally posted by: lunarrover
Freedom to say stuff means nothing without any semblance of evidence, at least the frosted layovers are obvious to see as are images where shadows are all wrong etc. they used the state of the art techniques of the day and that is how they did it just the waty Disney taught them.

What you have been talking about is very far from state of the art, it's a stupid method of hiding detail that would not work as good common photo editing.

Everyone I have shown this to agrees that there is an edge where clear detail can be seen then the frosted layover can be seen in many images, so anyways we can keep going until blue in the face.

From what I have seen, most people think that an image with more contrast is better and looks more natural, ignoring that they are looking at a reduced quality version of the original.

One question: why do you think the photo you posted was not altered?

originally posted by: lunarrover
a reply to: wmd_2008

Freedom to say stuff means nothing without any semblance of evidence, at least the frosted layovers are obvious to see as are images where shadows are all wrong etc. they used the state of the art techniques of the day and that is how they did it just the waty Disney taught them.

Deffo sh1thouse trickery was used.

Everyone I have shown this to agrees that there is an edge where clear detail can be seen then the frosted layover can be seen in many images, so anyways we can keep going until blue in the face.

Show us the shadow problems mr expert pick 3 image problems not including your BS about Disney and we can shoot them down.

originally posted by: Phage
Command module antenna.
www.lpi.usra.edu...

Damn. Look at the stars in that picture... Looks nothing like they do when viewing through our atmosphere. I thought you couldn't see the stars once you got out in space, didn't I read that on here somewhere?

a reply to: lunarrover

I'm not interested in changing your mind, and I know that people only change their mind if they are open to that idea before anyone tries it. Any person that do not even accepts the idea of being wrong doesn't accept other possibilities, and that's how you have been acting on this thread.

I agree that some members have been a little too aggressive in the way they post their opinions, but the way you act, as if you are right and everybody else is wrong, without providing any supporting evidence of what you say, makes it hard for other people to accept your opinion.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Phage
Command module antenna.
www.lpi.usra.edu...

Damn. Look at the stars in that picture... Looks nothing like they do when viewing through our atmosphere. I thought you couldn't see the stars once you got out in space, didn't I read that on here somewhere?

GaryN one of our members claimed that he was of course wrong although what looks like stars on that image may not be due to exposure settings.

a reply to: ArMaP

I have posted a lot of supporting evidence on this thread have you even bothered to look at it? the explanations received have been "download the high res image" I take a look and they are like they were grabbed from a local rag printed in 1910 CGI or worse????

I'll be more open to ideas but not much positive responses coming back? in my defence some of my reactions are me responding to aggression, we could all do better in that regard.

In the end though it is all just my opinion. Being told nothing is there when something looks obviously odd is strange but it is what it is I suppose.

I'm convinced about the layovers and others are too.

a reply to: lunarrover

Do you mean something by quoting that?

a reply to: ArMaP

It was a sarcastic acknowledgement

so.....billions of dollars and tens of thousands of man hours, with a historic visit to the moon.....and this was the best photography provided and/or technically available?.....yeeeeah ok

Anyone else notice this optical illusion. The white wispy part seems to be moving, or is it just me?

originally posted by: lunarrover
I have posted a lot of supporting evidence on this thread have you even bothered to look at it? the explanations received have been "download the high res image" I take a look and they are like they were grabbed from a local rag printed in 1910 CGI or worse????

What you posted looks more like more examples of what you think than evidence that it is what you mean. Evidence, to me, would help understand how it's done, and we don't get a thing from your posts.

In the end though it is all just my opinion. Being told nothing is there when something looks obviously odd is strange but it is what it is I suppose.

Looking odd doesn't mean that it was a filter added to try to hide structures.

a reply to: ArMaP

Yes you already said you can't see anything ok mate there is nothing in this thread of interest to you.

Not everyone here feels the same, split opinion is fine. If you don't get it fair enough. Some people keep telling me there are no glass biosphere yet they stick out like a sore thumb and are easy to spot, just like all of the hexagonal geometric shapes, hexagonal structures are amazingly strong and occur in nature so no wonder an intelligent race would employ their use.

originally posted by: lunarrover
Yes you already said you can't see anything ok mate there is nothing in this thread of interest to you.

Wrong, the fact that I don't see it doesn't mean I'm not interested in the topic. I'm interested for at least two reasons: to try to understand why you see it and because it's possible that you are seeing something that is really there.

originally posted by: lunarrover
a reply to: ArMaP

I have posted a lot of supporting evidence on this thread have you even bothered to look at it? the explanations received have been "download the high res image" I take a look and they are like they were grabbed from a local rag printed in 1910 CGI or worse????

No, you haven't. All you've done is posted a photograph and go "look, see!" as if that's all that is required of you. You have not just been "told to download the high res image", you have actually been given the high res images to look at, all of them, from a variety of sources, and been given a link that shows you how to do the same. You have not even attempted to try and look at the alternative sources provided and have simply handwaved away any arguments or evidence that contradict your blinkered and completely wrong mindset.

I'll be more open to ideas but not much positive responses coming back? in my defence some of my reactions are me responding to aggression, we could all do better in that regard.

Aww diddums, did you not instantly get hordes of people wanting to carry you aloft to receive your acclaim from the cheering crowds? Poor baby.

What you've done is tell people that they are dupes, that the evidence they are providing to rebut your totally unsupported claims is fake without any kind of sensible explanation as to why and refused to listen to reasoned alternative explanations for your sight deficiency. You have claimed expertise and experience that you very obviously don't have. There are only so many attempts at pleasantries and reasonable discourse you can make before that kind of nonsense needs calling for what it is: ill-informed and dishonest trolling.

In the end though it is all just my opinion. Being told nothing is there when something looks obviously odd is strange but it is what it is I suppose.

I'm convinced about the layovers and others are too.

Your belief proves nothing, simply stating things are there prove nothing, neither does having a few other people with your degree of myopia. What matters are facts. Facts like images from several different probes and countries all showing that your claims are nonsense. Facts like high resolution copies of images (including hard copies pre-dating the digital age) that don't show what you claim they show. Facts like the objects you claim are there would be visible from Earth with an amateur telescope but are not. Facts like you claiming that a crater in one location was another and saying that it didn't matter that you were basing your conclusion that things were being hidden on that mis-identification.

There are no overlays of frosting on the images. Look into what Reseau plates are, how they worked and when they were used, and see if you can work out which cameras used them and which didn't.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Im not here to proove anything, to ask me to is like nailing jello to a wall. If I post something and see sumink fishy and say hay I can see sumink fishy it is here and this is why I think it fishy? not for me to convince you?? The aliens replicate nature and dont build squares like we do so for most people that dont have the ability to recognise the abstract way that they create structures in a lunar environment is down to education and because it is abstract and alien it can be tough to see or have it explained in a coherent way because of how alien it is to us. Just pointing and grunting does not help. Some of the structures look like a sort of fungus and oxygen free glass is stronger than steel and they are adept users of the materials they have at their disposal. My advise on any of this is to say look at this image of something strange that looks like it is not natural or I find bothersome? To jump up and down like a chimp brained knuckle dragger is not really adding much. Go take a look is what I mean for people to do not take my word for it as that would be foolish. If you think what I say is trash you can bin it and move on. Do your own research is probably best because that is what we all should be doing. If what I have said isn't good enough then tough because that is the way I am doing my research. I am open to new ideas as long as they are not designed to hoodwink or con.

a reply to: lunarrover

to add you cant see mare smythii from earth but you can see structures from earth and people do with telescopes all day long. I will post some research I am doing on the sea of fertility because that area is full of structures like stone henge. I admitted I made a mistake with Kies we have done that one, you are like a dog with a bone lol