Astounding Moon Footage! Did NASA Want You To See This?

Now here's something interesting! Check out this image I posted on the previous page.



I've increased contrast and unsharped the mask. Do you notice something ONLY around the 'tower'? Wonder why? Is something emanating from it?



Internos and ArMaP can probably throw some light on this phenomenon!

Cheers!



[edit on 27-11-2007 by mikesingh]

Originally posted by jedimiller
Art Bell has said, there's rocks and dirt in the moon. And that's all he see's. He said the same about Mars, and he was right about that too. Dirt and rocks. that's all folks!

and we know that how exactly? you mean, the govt doesnt keep secrets? well, i guess since they say there are only rocks, and since you do as well, i guess ill believe you. thanks for the expert advice.

Originally posted by internos
reply to post by spikedmilk

 

Spikedmilk, where did you take this image?

Looks familiar, to me

What about to post the credits to the original poster, my friend?

Hey there Internos, was it one of yours? If so, I stand here before all and announce, I am a picture jerk. I seriously apologize, i'd certainly give credit where its due. I kinda lost track of where some of these had come from. I thought I had yanked it from here ......galactic2.net... looking at it again, i was wrong. now, i shall go make myself drink some curdled milk.....
and thanx for the hi-re version of the cable antennae!

[edit on 27-11-2007 by spikedmilk]

[edit on 27-11-2007 by spikedmilk]

Originally posted by Odessy

and we know that how exactly? you mean, the govt doesnt keep secrets? well, i guess since they say there are only rocks, and since you do as well, i guess ill believe you. thanks for the expert advice.

Odessy, we have seen images of the moon. Images of mars, images of other objects in space. it's all dust, sand, rocks, gas. everyone can see that. Art Bell agrees with me on that, he said he seen rocks and rocks they are. I don't see any bases, cities, aliens, spaceships. do you?

reply to post by spikedmilk

Come on, it was a joke!
Feel free to post and repost my pics my friend. At the end, the credits should be given to NASA, not to me :
About the pic from Luna mission, what do you know about it? I wasn't able to find it ...


[edit on 27/11/2007 by internos]

reply to post by internos


really?! ahh relief, i'm about sick of this curdled milk and coffee (or what they like to call coffee here at work) ....

Isnt that Luna 17 pic something? , I want to get it poster sized or framed like a Van Gogh or something. NGC2736 gave me the idea by mentioning Picasso and it was all downhill from there. Now I know what I gotta do. Heres the link for ya...www.bibliotecapleyades.net... , thats all I have on it for now. I am on the lookout for more tho...

[edit on 27-11-2007 by spikedmilk]

[edit on 27-11-2007 by spikedmilk]

Originally posted by jedimiller

Originally posted by Odessy

and we know that how exactly? you mean, the govt doesnt keep secrets? well, i guess since they say there are only rocks, and since you do as well, i guess ill believe you. thanks for the expert advice.

Odessy, we have seen images of the moon. Images of mars, images of other objects in space. it's all dust, sand, rocks, gas. everyone can see that. Art Bell agrees with me on that, he said he seen rocks and rocks they are. I don't see any bases, cities, aliens, spaceships. do you?

Ive see nasa moon documents with airbrushed out images...
And ive seen neil armstrong in interviews describe the things he saw...
And ive seen videos from other govt sources with unexplained ufo activities on the moon.

There is more to believe that what nasa and other large "corporations" release to the public. Same goes for the govt. If they want to conceal whats really going on, they can, because they are the higher authority.

How can you not believe that something fishy is going on with all the information out there, from legitimate sources? Or have you not done your HW?



To completely just dismiss the issue or jump to conclusions immediately is ignorance.

[edit on 27-11-2007 by Odessy]

reply to post by jedimiller



I have not posted at all for the last several days because nothing really piqued my interest, however, I feel that these are pretty decent shots of something(s) on the surface of the moon. That can be up for debate on both sides, but don't make yourself out to be the be all end all of what should or should not be perceived as something of a manufactured origin on an extraterrestrial body. There are many more indications that is in fact something real, and not some malicious dust on the lens that moves about on its own accord.

I really don't think that anyone should listen to a person who claims to have personally met the Devil, believes Michael Jackson was abducted by aliens, and here's my personal favorite; believes that because air is invisible and still exists than god must too. C'mon jedimiller.... please cut the B.S. out. Go lock yourself in your room and spoon with a lifesize Boba Fett doll.

reply to post by Osiris1953


that was uncalled for. don't do it again, or i'll be forced to tattle on ya to the amigos (or their underlings). even if i totally disagree with jedimiller, i still respect his right to his opinion (and i think it's in the TOS, ya know?)

Originally posted by mikesingh
Now here's something interesting! Check out this image I posted on the previous page.

I've increased contrast and unsharped the mask. Do you notice something ONLY around the 'tower'? Wonder why? Is something emanating from it?

It's called a JPEG compression artifact. One would think you'd recognize them by now.

Here. Do the same thing on the uncompressed TIFF version of the picture. See anything?

Who these so-called 'top' NASA officials are, we may never know. And therefore, credibility may have taken a beating here! But then, what if it is legit?

You are right about one thing...We will never be told about it and they will certainly be more careful about such leaks in the future!

Originally posted by jedimiller
I've examined the footage. having taking numerous photography courses I can safely come to the conclusion that it's a dirty lens. perhaps a hair or fabric got into the developing and made it out to look that way. could also be a burn in the film, but it's a micro defect. Cameras and film get beaten up in space and function funny in space. hope this helps.

I can't stand it..... this has to be the most retarded, pathetic attempt at skepticism that I have ever read:

1. if it were a lens or film issue the "thing" would not be "stuck" to the ground on the moon. It would move across the surface and be stuck "in frame". The surface of the moon would move under the "thing".

2. The cameras sent into orbit around any space object are built like tanks. They can withstand micro-meteorite impacts, drastic changes in temperature and a host of other very nasty environment issues we don't need to think about living on the blue planet.

3. You obviously didn't learn any thing in photograghy class.
4. Go back to class and pay attention this time.
5. Take a logic course or something too.... you obviously need it.

-Euclid

Originally posted by mikesingh
Now here's something interesting! Check out this image I posted on the previous page.

I found the kangaroo on another picture. (on the horizon to the left of the astronaut). Can you see it mikesingh?

reply to post by looofo


Heck looofo when did you find that ?

Have you posted it in the past on any other thread because I have not seen it before.

Anyway excellent find, I think a blow up and repost is in order as is a star.

I will leave the enlargement to Mike or internos though

reply to post by sherpa

IMHO, whatever is it, isn't static: once you compare these three shots, you will notice that the object is no longer visible in pic # 3 (in pic # 1 is out of target): i also noticed that in the pic # 2 there are other marks in the top right area of the same color, but different shape. The best comparison to do is between #2 and # 3 which have almost the same perspective, IMHO .

1 - www.hq.nasa.gov...
2 - www.hq.nasa.gov...
3 - www.hq.nasa.gov...


[edit on 27/11/2007 by internos]

reply to post by internos


Thanks internos but if you look at the shadow from the astronaut taking the picture in all 3 images you can see that the field of vision has changed.


Photo 1 shadow is closer to subject so decreasing field of view to left.

Photo 2 with anomaly, shadow to right of subject so increasing field of view to left.

Photo 3 shadow to left of subject decreasing field of view to left.

So I believe you would not see the anomaly in all three frames

edit spelling


[edit on 27-11-2007 by sherpa]

Originally posted by sherpa
reply to post by internos

 

Thanks internos but if you look at the shadow from the astronaut taking the picture in all 3 images you can see that the field of vision has changed.


Photo 1 shadow is closer to subject so decreasing field of view to left.

Photo 2 with anomaly, shadow to right of subject so increasing field of view to left.

Photo 3 shadow to left of subject decreasing field of view to left.

So I believe you would not see the anomaly in all three frames

edit spelling

About the perspective, i think that you're right (maybe the pic # 3 covers the area, but the focus at that point is different).
I mean, that the blue marks are visible only in the picture # 2, the one with the object at the left (barely visible a small mark in pic#3): i posted the three pics (previous, current and next) in order to assest that they are visible only in that one.
Close-up

Other marks




[edit on 27/11/2007 by internos]

Originally posted by internos

IMHO, whatever is it, isn't static: once you compare these three shots, you will notice that the object is no longer visible in pic # 3 (in pic # 1 is out of target): i also noticed that in the pic # 1 there are other marks in the top right area of the same color, different shape. The best comparison is between #2 and # 3 which have almost the same angle: in the first the object is visible, in the third no longer, IMHO

.

Nice pull looofo and internos.

Quick comparative analysis of the pics internos linked...

Pic #2 shows "kangaroo" anomaly and has bright sun reflection off of the visor.

Pic #1 has no anomaly and has bright sun reflection off of the visor. Picture is also at a different position and/or zoom and angle to the sun (see flag pole shadow) than pic #1.

Pic #3 shows no anomaly and no bright sun reflection.

Given similar cases that have come through ATS, it may be another case of a bright light source reflecting in the camera optics.




[edit on 27-11-2007 by IAttackPeople]

reply to post by IAttackPeople

You're right

Ok so lets say for the sake of argument that this is a reflection in the camera lens, are we looking for a blue reflective.

Or is the colour produced by refraction in which case only shape could help in identifying the cause.

How much curvature is there on the Haselblad lens, if it is not to curved should we not see the cause in the image ?