NASA Moon Anomalies III - Other Peoples Work

Originally posted by ArMaP

Those things look like small fibres that were on the scanner's glass,

These aren't fibres.

I could post fibres, if that is what I wanted you want to look at...

Alas, I do not.

*With your continued misapplications of 'fibre-hypothesis' you will never find any pipeline, roads, tunnels or tubes that may be on the moon. Nor will you find smoke or streams/plumes of gas associated with the geological activity that has recently been acknowledged.

With the Fibre-hypothesis, all you will ever find is fibres. But that is the whole point of the fibre-hypothesis, is it not?




[edit on 24-12-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by ArMaP

I second that! These so called 'smoke plumes' are nothing but dust/fibers on the scan! If that was smoke it would have spread out and attenuated.

Here's another image from LO of a fiber or scratch on the scan:


JPL/NASA

Or is it them Red Indians on the Moon cooking up some soup at the edge of that crater?

C'mon guys, get real! The spins being trotted out for every glitch seen on an image as something produced by aliens is getting tiresome!

Originally posted by OrionHunterX

C'mon guys, get real! The spins being trotted out for every glitch seen on an image as something produced by aliens is getting tiresome!

I don't believe in aliens.

And you don't know how pyroclastic material behaves in the lunar environment

It would be a shame if you were to dismiss images of a volcanically active lunar location because of your inability to not associate these finds with aliens.




[edit on 24-12-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by Exuberant1


At 1st I thought a lot of the fibers/scratches were just that - but after a deeper look, I too see pipe like structures, or wire like frames that look to have been wrecked over time.

A lot of these anomalies like this usually connect to strange parts in each image. The smoke stack the last poster posted is interesting due to the very fact where it connects to the ground - which looks like at the very least a peak of some kind. Now if that last image posted was just a scratch, you'd think the chances of it appearing where it does would be quite unlikely.

So again, I suggest before anyone dismisses wires/pipes or even smoke plumes - focus your attention to where they start and where they end, and then step back, you'll be very surprised what you see

Originally posted by Exuberant1
These aren't fibres.

How can you be so sure?

I could post fibres, if that is what I wanted you want to look at...

Obviously you could, and obviously you didn't post those thinking they were fibres, what would have been the point with that?

But do you think that there is at least a chance of those being fibres?

*With your continued misapplications of 'fibre-hypothesis' you will never find any pipeline, roads, tunnels or tubes that may be on the moon. Nor will you find smoke or streams/plumes of gas associated with the geological activity that has recently been acknowledged.

Maybe, but that's why I am also looking at other people's work, because I know that my opinion, regardless of my best efforts, will always be somewhat affected by my way of thinking.

That's why I never dismiss any of those findings, because even if I am 90% sure about those being fibres, even if I was 100% sure there is always the possibility of being wrong and those 100% would mean nothing.

With the Fibre-hypothesis, all you will ever find is fibres. But that is the whole point of the fibre-hypothesis, is it not?

No, I can find them and, even thinking they are fibres, they aren't dismissed as such, my opinions are only used to classify the possibilities, and in this case I think that the best possibility of explanation is the fibre theory.

That doesn't mean that I am always looking for fibres, what I look for are things that look out of place. But being out of place on a Moon photo doesn't mean that it was something on the Moon itself, specially on Lunar Orbiter photos, because of the way the photos were made.

Also, as I said, I have seen many digitised photos (the company where I work has digitising services and we have digitised something like 2.5 million documents in the last 3 years, besides the hundreds of photos that I have digitised myself during the last 15 or 16 years), and those are the type of things I look for when doing quality check on the digitised photos.

PS: if I (or someone else) find something looking like that on an originally digital photo, then you can be sure that my "fibre theory" would get a 0% probability of explain it.

I must say what the hell are you guys looking at?I totaly agree there seems to be some airbrushing on some photos of the moon,but you guys have zero solid proof.

I mean zero.

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow


Hey,

Here is 'fibre' which appears to cast a shadow on the lunar surface...:

....So we check the next shot in the sequence (if it covers the same region) - and lo' and behold, the object is gone; It really was a fibre. (You see, we have ways of testing this sort of thing) :

Any how - back to the stuff that is really there on the moon:


Here be something straight on the rim of a crater. This one is too small to determine much about it's nature, not enough data:

Here is a high albedo, tube-like structure which is visible as such due to its situation on the upper edge of a crater.

Zoom in on it and you will see that it casts a shadow as it emerges from the darker part of the crater:

*These are from Apollo metrics images, right-click on the image and select view image to see the frame number or save the image.



[edit on 25-12-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by ArMaP


how about supporting data......

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by mcrom901


Wow, nice one Mcrom!

I'm glad someone else is reading those .pdfs.

Great work mate.

reply to post by mcrom901

Supporting data for what? Those photos I was talking about?

I don't understand what you mean by that.

reply to post by Exuberant1


Some more "hairy moon" pics ...
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/73861430e812daba.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/f34495475216b2d0.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/8a1cdef2c1ae6c39.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/928d25087eff6198.jpg[/atsimg]

Perhaps this is where the term 'waxing Moon' originated

reply to post by Exuberant1


cheers buddy.... thanks to you for posting those links in the first place

and hats off to easynow for pointing out that weird report

anyways.... you gotta check out jose's new release..... "LUNA"



there is a "moon monkey" at the end of clip 3......

"and the rains getting pretty steep"

www.funnyordie.com...

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by mcrom901

 

Supporting data for what? Those photos I was talking about?

I don't understand what you mean by that.

sorry for the confusion....

i was not referring exactly to that specific picture.... just pointing out to some mysterious possibilities....

happy holidays every1...

[edit on 26/12/09 by mcrom901]

reply to post by mcrom901



I've seen it already. Clementine images...


I have to say though, that Cary Martyniuk is my favourite young NASA historian. He digs deeper than most and good on him for that.

Some say he's been known to post around these parts.

Originally posted by mcrom901
there is a "moon monkey" at the end of clip 3......

The transcript for that video on the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal says:

135:37:58 Shepard: Okay. (Pause) Okay. The condensate tank has already been discarded, Houston.
135:38:07 Haise: Roger, Al.
    [On Surface Checklist page 7-3, they are supposed to place the "PLSS Condensate Container" in the jettison bag that they will discard during their final hatch opening prior to launch. Evidently, they are getting rid of it here.]

That would be a good reason for Mission Control not saying a thing about it, right?

sorry for the confusion....

i was not referring exactly to that specific picture.... just pointing out to some mysterious possibilities....

happy holidays every1...

OK, thanks for the explanation, I sometimes get easily confused.

Old same pictures

This new (6 months old) picture have no hair inside.
anaxagoras crater
LRO: Northwest of Anaxagoras A

Wkipedia: Anaxagoras Greek Philosopher

[edit on 26-12-2009 by mixmix]

reply to post by mixmix


That's because the Moon has had a Brazillian since then

*mcrom901 thanks for that link to Joe's "Luna"! Can't wait to view it now.

So, did "The Shrike" ever post any of his "Lunar Anomalist Research" for us all to look at? Or am I just wasting my time?

reply to post by Jocko Flocko


No he did not.

Nor did OrionHunterX post any anomalies.

I guess they don't want to post anomalies, yet they have no problems with being disrespectful and condescending.

*With the demonstration they have put on thus far, perhaps they are trying to lower us to their level and then beat us with experience when we get down there (where there's no anomalies apparently).

Originally posted by Jocko Flocko
So, did "The Shrike" ever post any of his "Lunar Anomalist Research" for us all to look at? Or am I just wasting my time?

My "anomalist research" centered on proving authors such as Leonard and Steckling, primarily Steckling, that they made mistakes in their unfounded claims. Since Leonard washed his hands off the whole thing that left Steckling who died and his son is carrying on with the same bulls__t.

My researcha was thorough but I didn't realize in the '80s that it was going to to influence so many gullible believers and that websites left and right were going to be created perpetualizing bs. Now it's too late and even if I were to go though the trouble of publishing the results of my research, even on the Internet, it's too late.

As long as I have Steckling's letter admitting I was right and he was wrong, I'm happy. It's just frustrating seeing the gullibles here on ATS and other forums believing the bs.

When I see one, just one, NASA photo showing an honest-to-goodness unnatural feature, not colorized blurry, out-of-focus, or over-pixelated enhanced "structure" I'll jump for joy.

But Steckling is still a fool, even dead! And so is his son. And anyone believing him/them.

reply to post by The Shrike



So no anomalies from you then...

That was predictable.