There really are man-made structures on the moon PROOF

reply to post by Bob Down Under

Damn straight!

And your signature is hilarious! (JL used the ol' 30 grit on me more n once!)

So Nasa does not air brush??

May be the processor had a cold at the time.



[edit on 20-12-2008 by Bob Down Under]

reply to post by SS,Naga


reply to post by Bob Down Under
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Damn straight!

And your signature is hilarious! (JL used the ol' 30 grit on me more n once!)




Your welcome! and do try my best.





[edit on 20-12-2008 by Bob Down Under]

reply to post by Bob Down Under


Bobdown under those photos are fake

if you bother going to:
www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...
and entering the lat, long, resolution, pixel data from the image you posted's border, and s forth, you will find that is NOT the actual image.
which is funny because according to those images borders, the site i gave is the source.
infact its easy to tell where someone deliberately blurred a photo because a crater is only half shown and so forth, in the images you posted, and it wasnt NASA.



[edit on 21-12-2008 by NavalFC]

[edit on 21-12-2008 by NavalFC]

[edit on 21-12-2008 by NavalFC]

[edit on 21-12-2008 by NavalFC]

Originally posted by NavalFC
Bobdown under those photos are fake
if you bother going to:
www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...
and entering the lat, long, resolution, pixel data from the image you posted's border, and s forth, you will find that is NOT the actual image.

Are you ABSOLUTELY sure about that? or is it MAYBE possible that Skipper made a slight error and left out a minus sign?

And unfortunately using the version 1.5 of the Navy Clementine browser in the early days produced very lousy quality images because that is all we were allowed to see...

Now then if you use THESE co ordinates
Lat -70 ~ Long 137 thats a MINUS sign in front of the 70... something a naval person would understand as the Navy uses a different system for lat and long

Well if you checked THAT spot you would find THIS



Now why anyone still uses the old version is beyond me.. but you saying the picture is a FAKE tells me either you really do work for THEM and are deliberately trying to distract with false info... OR you truly have no clue about what is going on.

Now when Skipper at Mars Anomaly Research first did those it was years ago when all that was available from the Navy at that time was lousy pixellated copies in very low res jpegs. Version 2.0 has much better images, but still not that great considering what was actually photographed by Clementine...

which is funny because according to those images borders, the site i gave is the source. infact its easy to tell where someone deliberately blurred a photo because a crater is only half shown and so forth, in the images you posted, and it wasnt NASA.

Well now I am certain you are not an agent, just someone who doesn't have a clue... first of all NASA only ran mission control. Clementine was a DoD/Navy ballistic Missile Defense Agency satellite mapping the moon for the Star Wars program... not really hard to look up and that is why the images are hosted at the NRL (Naval Research Laboratory) not at NASA

Here is the original in Version 2.0 data set

Desired Resolution
1 pixel = 1 kilometer
Image Size In Pixels
768x768

Here is the direct link to the one you say is FAKE

So let me give you a sorely needed lesson... but before I do that... can you explain why the NAVY has THIS on their front page of the link YOU provided?

The Naval Research Laboratory is not affiliated in any way with any organization selling lunar property or acreage on the moon. NRL has no involvement, either officially or unofficially, in providing "after-sales service" for the purchase of lunar property from the Lunar Embassy, its franchisees, or any similar organizations. Disputes arising from the purchase of lunar property from such organizations must be resolved with the seller directly.

www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...

Okay on to the lesson

Reiner Gamma
Magnetic Anomaly Near Side

Here is Reiner Gamma from Marsanomalyresearch using the old version one data set... you can see the odd white shape below and left of the square... that is Reiner Gamma. Jan - May, 1994



Are we to believe that is the best a multi million dollar satellite could do? No? Well most did and used those pictures for anomaly hunting.

For comparison here is Reiner Gamma and Reiner Crater taken with a 10' scope from London England in Dec 2005...



So why did we spend all that money?

Well when you use the data set from Version 2.0 (now also being used on the 1.5 browser)

Version 2.0
www.nrl.navy.mil...

I am glad they put the 2.0 data on the 1.5 because 2.0 is harder to use

So for Reiner Gamma in Version 2.0 data set we get this...



So okay then a little better...

But Clementine took pictures in 1994 and there was only ONE set... so why different 'released' data sets? And why in black and white when Clementine took pictures in COLOR using the UVVIS camera?
(UVVIS Ultra Violet Visible Light.... Color images slightly enhanced by adding UV spectrum and a little IR spectrum)

So what doe Reiner Gamma REALLY look like?

Like THIS



And this is just a 10% reduction of the available size

Reiner Crater full size




Color Mosaics of The Moon
Arizona State University
ser.sese.asu.edu...
also available from USGS Map-a-Planet

The big gigabyte images need ISIS III and a Linus system to open


So to make a long story short

YOU ARE IN ERROR






.,.

[edit on 21-12-2008 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon


WOW!!! Zorgon

Double torpedoes in the port side! and thanks for backing me up there.

If that didnt sink NavalFC then I cant wait for his come back

In the first video, at the time of 1:20, that's clearly not a rock. Smooth surface with what looks to an entrance. The other stuff looked like rocks but this one stood out to me.



This is for the fuzzy rocks people. lol

[edit on 21-12-2008 by MegaBears]

reply to post by zorgon
I stand corrected zorgon.There is no darkside of the moon.

Originally posted by zorgon

But Clementine took pictures in 1994 and there was only ONE set... so why different 'released' data sets? And why in black and white when Clementine took pictures in COLOR using the UVVIS camera?
(UVVIS Ultra Violet Visible Light.... Color images slightly enhanced by adding UV spectrum and a little IR spectrum)

So what doe Reiner Gamma REALLY look like?

Like THIS

Same dataset, different web based processing. You can have golden input but garbage output if the coding sucks.


There is no true color imagery from the UVVIS camera on Clementine. This camera carried six filters: 415nm, 750nm, 900nm, 950nm, 1000nm, and a broadband 400-800 nm filter. Of these only the 415nm filter and the broadband filter included any part of the visible spectrum (the 415 only a very, very small part). Broadband does not mean color, it means that a broad spectrum is allowed to reach the sensors. The reason for using the broadband filter is to obtain higher detail and dynamic range. But, no matter what filter is being used, the only thing the sensor sees is brightness levels, all you get is greyscale (you know..."black and white", full spectrum but no color.)

The UVVIS camera did not take color photos. True color cannot be extracted from broadband greyscale. True color cannot be reconstructed from narrow band filters that do not include visible light. All of the Clementine UVVIS color composites are false color. I'm pretty sure the same is true of the high resolution camera.

[edit on 12/22/2008 by Phage]