The Secrets of Schröteri Crater

Originally posted by Silverlok
reply to post by ArMaP

 

Any sites have multiple over lap ( especially in the pre-digital era, ) nasa as a 'de-facto' military information gathering unit uses multiple redundancy as a standard procedure . It's in the protocol, if you can't be bothered to check why should you be answering as a mod on this subject?

This is something I'd like to learn more about too. Could you show us where you got this information.

reply to post by Phage


A simple LOL might have sufficed in preference to the sarcastic self-love, Phage.

Of course he means 'albedo' - but you knew that anyway. A digital slip of the tongue, perhaps.
At the end of the day, the man is obviously highly informed, so who can really say?

My personal thoughts? I don't know, but suspect there are some pretty awesome things going on up there.

Originally posted by FlyInTheOintment
reply to post by Phage

 

A simple LOL might have sufficed in preference to the sarcastic self-love, Phage.

Of course he means 'albedo' - but you knew that anyway. A digital slip of the tongue, perhaps.
At the end of the day, the man is obviously highly informed, so who can really say?

My personal thoughts? I don't know, but suspect there are some pretty awesome things going on up there.

In the realm of speculation , I would say yes interesting now and then in a history sort of way , and thanks for the albedo thing , but I did use libido purposefully, I try not to ask a question if I don't have a decent idea of the answer already, and joking and sarcasm are in my ornery blood ; libido implies albedo to the intelligent , but gives chocolates to the kids so they have something to keep them occupied until one gets to wallyworld, so to speak.

protocol and clementine, well the first thing one needs to do when understanding satellite recon and intel is to know what capabilities and under what protocol the information was obtained ( so that one knows angle, time latitude (to calc shadows)etc, etc and of course if the image is composite or not ), so that would seem pertinent ...

clementines capabilities

Charged Particle Telescope (CPT), Ultraviolet/Visible camera, Near-Infrared CCD Camera (NIR), Laser Image Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) System, High-Resolution Camera (HIRES), and an improvised: Bistatic Radar Experiment

wow so there is quite a bit of data available on a number of electromagnetic frequencies , not just a single visible light ( "color corrected") image, including LIDAR which when all combined would give an amazing 3-d picture of the moon withing a meter or so resolution extending even slightly below the surface, but as to the : "not completely covered " comment (phage/armap):

wiki

Moon's surface was covered completely during the two month lunar mapping phase of the mission.

but even given multi-spectral images and lidar measurements, we have this one photo from the hires cam of the oddity , interestingly a true expert in analysis, has some interesting information about clementine and NAsa:

www.marsanomalyresearch.com...

here is an excerpt:

Note how they curve and converge together at the North and South Poles. These lines are reportedly the result of imaging composite effects. It works like this, the individual images are taken during orbital paths from the South to North Poles and then shifting over west about 2.3 degrees per each next orbit. The individual images are ultimately put together to form a mosiac whole like the two global images you see above. These image orbital "path" lines can be better seen by viewing the much larger imaging of the PIA00302 Near Side and the PIA00304 Far Side official links offering a much larger view.

now this Nasa 'heretic' above has some interesting ideas about the what's and why's but he does his homework, each orbit shifts 2.3 degrees , but the visible hi-res cam only has a workable window of

The field of view was 0.3 x 0.4 degrees, translating to a width of about 2 km at a nominal lunar altitude of 400 km

, so we should have a very interesting "wireframed" hi-res 'vivsible' moon as .4 degrees substracted from 2.3 is 1.9 or less than 18% of the moons surface being photographed in hi-res , which was one of the missions goals.

o.k so let's say the hi-res ( as nasa says) is for "special areas of interest:" that means the strip we are looking at was targeted as a SPECIAL AREA OF INTEREST, why ?

and since the imager has filters :

with a bandpass of 400 to 800 nm, four narrow-band filters with center wavelengths (and bandpass width (FWHM)) of 415 nm (40 nm), 560 nm (10 nm), 650 nm (10 nm), and 750 nm (20 nm),...the nominal imaging rate was about 10 frames per second in individual image bursts covering all filters at the Moon

415=purple, 560=yellow( big jump from purple ), 650=red/orange, and 750, out of the visible spectrum ( hence ultra violet ) , interesting color scheme, seeing as television and print adopted an RGB (+Y for print) as best for human vision ( after several decades of testing ) but NASA chose PYR, which seriously deteriorates anything blue, but still:

ahaaha four colors (like a comic book of old m even though one of the colors is invisible to humans ) , but with only three of them visible and microsecond differences in position when captured , small but enough again to construct a 3-d model , in fact they are almost perfectly timed for a stereoscopic effect using more than just blue and red , given that computers have as many eyes as is necessary for perspective

so it would seem protocol is important , if answering as a non-mod, ats...

The 'divergences' look to be spaced regularly apart, this gives me the impression that whatever the object is it rolled down that hill and a protuberance on the right hand side made the tracks as it came around with each revolution.

As to what the object is, no bloody idea mate!

...should have two avatars , one for when you are acting as a mod and another for when you are acting as a poster...

but as a fellow whom is an expert on UFO"S without ever seeing one perhaps the rules are different

Originally posted by Pimander

Originally posted by Silverlok
reply to post by ArMaP

 

Any sites have multiple over lap ( especially in the pre-digital era, ) nasa as a 'de-facto' military information gathering unit uses multiple redundancy as a standard procedure . It's in the protocol, if you can't be bothered to check why should you be answering as a mod on this subject?

This is something I'd like to learn more about too. Could you show us where you got this information.

which bit ? I would start with the link to the "nasa heretic" in the previous link , but ask and ...well damn you know it ....

Rocks,People are so scared to admit this may be something of alien origin or something else.

Fear is a suprising thing.Also why does Armap bother to post?He/she debunks every single post bar none.

OK, I'm reading through the thread and came across an idea.
What if the rolling object ran into some boulders and stopped?

The object at the end of the trail is a lot larger than the path. It's irregular and difficult to imagine as something that would roll. It makes sense that the rolling object just happened to run into a cluster of boulders where it was stopped.

I've highlighted the object I imagine as rolling and making the track. Notice that there is a butt shaped indentation. It could be the cause of the unusual repeating pattern in the trail.



Had to use ImageShack to upload the pic. How long has the ATS media site been down?

In addition, my take on the lay of the land says that the trail indeed does roll downhill. If you look at the larger picture, the high ground is lighter and the low ground is darker. There's a patch of relatively light material towards the other end of the trail and the end point seems to be somewhat darker than the surrounding area. It's certainly darker than the area near the beginning of the trail.

a) This could have been hoaxed, the thing could be just placed in the photo and made blend in with the restm including its shadow.
b) it is real and is debris
c) it is an abandoned rover/whatever other machine

And the point being here in this forum? No it's not alien.

Might have been mentioned before but it immediately reminded me of a Dune movie Spice Harvester...




Moon mining?

Originally posted by Imtor

And the point being here in this forum? No it's not alien.

Aliens aren't real bro.

Why are you here?

Originally posted by BruceWayne
Might have been mentioned before but it immediately reminded me of a Dune movie Spice Harvester...




Moon mining?

that has been mentioned here before, and has a certain reality 'feel' to it , but htat is just a warm an fuzzy moment from me i guess, as I thought the exact same thig when I first saw the picture .if it's dis info it's art, wag the dog baby

Originally posted by Silverlok
if it's dis info it's art..

I'm the discoverer.

I guess this would mean I'm in on it with NASA or they baited me with an irresistible title and I am just a simple pawn in their cruel game.

reply to post by zorgon



Very interesting. Actually I find this more interesting than the OP images. Never seen this before.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Silverlok
if it's dis info it's art..

I'm the discoverer.

I guess this would mean I'm in on it with NASA or they baited me with an irresistible title and I am just a simple pawn in their cruel game.

REALLY > THAT"S AN ANSWER ? but interesting spin do you believe it, or are you just being an as by association

reply to post by zorgon


Ok, I was prepping up my typical pessimistic, sarcastic jibe for you..

However.. ok. That is very, very interesting. While I don't think it's "ET" in nature, I do not think it's a stone/boulder/space dust.

That does look like something man made and looks like it was abandonded there for some reason. Genuinely very cool.

Originally posted by Silverlok
libido implies albedo to the intelligent , but gives chocolates to the kids so they have something to keep them occupied until one gets to wallyworld, so to speak.

But using the wrong words may confuse the people that are interested in this subject but not yet familiar with the more technical terms.

but as to the : "not completely covered " comment (phage/armap):
wiki

Moon's surface was covered completely during the two month lunar mapping phase of the mission.

Well, that doesn't explain why there are areas missing from here and some photos missing here (for example). That's why I said that the coverage was not complete.

o.k so let's say the hi-res ( as nasa says) is for "special areas of interest:" that means the strip we are looking at was targeted as a SPECIAL AREA OF INTEREST, why ?

What strip are you talking about?

415=purple, 560=yellow( big jump from purple ), 650=red/orange, and 750, out of the visible spectrum ( hence ultra violet ) , interesting color scheme, seeing as television and print adopted an RGB (+Y for print) as best for human vision ( after several decades of testing ) but NASA chose PYR, which seriously deteriorates anything blue, but still:

Doesn't print use CMYK instead of RGB+Y? Also, the camera had five filters, not four, on that list is missing the 400 nm to 950 nm broadband filter.

ahaaha four colors (like a comic book of old m even though one of the colors is invisible to humans ) , but with only three of them visible and microsecond differences in position when captured , small but enough again to construct a 3-d model , in fact they are almost perfectly timed for a stereoscopic effect using more than just blue and red , given that computers have as many eyes as is necessary for perspective

The time between photos was bigger than microseconds, the readout time was 27.4 milliseconds and the integration time between 0.2 and 733 milliseconds. The step and settle time of the stepper motor driving the filter wheel was less than 250 milliseconds. Based on the above, I guess that the time between consecutive photos was something between 0.25 and 1 seconds, and I don't think that that time was enough to get enough difference in two consecutive photos to make a stereo image.

so it would seem protocol is important , if answering as a non-mod, ats...

Could you please explain in what sense are you using the word "protocol"? I am getting a little confuse with the use of the word, probably because English is not my language. Thanks in advance.

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Imtor

And the point being here in this forum? No it's not alien.

Aliens aren't real bro.

Why are you here?

To sort out true from false, what is hoax, what is simply misinterpret object, and what is really unexplained. In short: think clearly and not be an idiot

reply to post by zorgon



What kind of scale are we talking here in this image? How large the the object that leaves the trail?