It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by looofo
It's not that I want to contradict what you say zorgon, but rocks bigger than a house crushed several houses next to where my family lives in italy during a earthquake. Those rocks did some hundreds of meters of rolling and bouncing before stopping.
A rock with a mass of 1kg here on earht has a mass of 1kg on the moon even though it would weight only 1/6 as much. Maybe someone can explain what this could mean for our problem.
Originally posted by TheBorg
Are there any top-down images of this crater in your archives? And if so, can you post one please?
TheBorg
Originally posted by zorgon
Originally posted by ZoooMer
Amazing photographs. Can someone give us a simple breakdown of the coordinates ? Like, are these from the back side of the moon ?
Ummmm you mean like Copernicus crater? Don't think John posted Lat. and Long.
Picture One...top left near the cross hairs
Sphere One with shadow
Another one down and to the right... looks like this picture has lots of these "critters"
And these just have to be bunker doors one open and one closed and maybe a couple more in line with the first two into the shadows?
Originally posted by TeslaandLyne
Ummmm you mean like Copernicus crater? Don't think John posted Lat. and Long.
Looks like hot linking was stopped by the web master.
Originally posted by Toadmund
Not only that, but zorgon fails to mention the measurement above the 1400 ft measurement that says it's apparently 4600 ft.
Not convincing me.
Rock rolls downhill.
Originally posted by looofo
Has this "glitch" been discussed before?
Originally posted by Zarniwoop
Zorgon. You mentioned several pages back that you had some more interesting info on Aristarcus (I "think")... Did I miss it or are you sand-bagging again
Originally posted by zorgon
I will have to identify that Crater first... might take a while. I had the lat and long for Vitello, no so on this on but I will work on it...
[ walks away grumbling.... more... they always want more......]
Originally posted by zorgon
... it also does not appear in 9294 or 9296 so its either a Peekaboo that popped in for one frame, or a refection on the lens as the rest of the panorama indicates that shot was close to the sun
At close inspection "Peekaboo" is a good option But then I am biased...It has a lot of detail in it to be simple lens flare
[edit on 25-2-2007 by zorgon]
Originally posted by Toadmund
this will be my last post on this dead horse,