Do these manipulated Apollo images hide an unknown civilization?

reply to post by playswithmachines


Both items have been removed to your link. Got another?

reply to post by DJW001


I posted the photo's on ATS media about a year ago, they have been removed.
So now they have been posted them here and this is a closeup.
We will ignore the 'rope' like anomaly for now, let's zoom in on this BLOB and see how it has been clumsily airbrushed out. With gamma filters etc, you can clearly see that a well defined object has been 'painted' over,
since this would have been the state of the software used back then.
You want more?
I've got loads.
Here's a short film i made about Shorty crater...

If you still think NASA is not covering anything up, why do they re-upload some photo's 24 hours after the first release?
Why have the re-uploads been altered?
Why was the Hubble sent up with a defective lens?
Why can't we see the Herschel pictures?
Does NASA stand for Never Assume Sheeple Awareness?

reply to post by playswithmachines


just an fyi, those links bring you to some kind of myspace front page....
second line....

22 pages and people are still drooling over something that not even the OP has bothered to prove.

ATS is slowly turning into the rest of the internet. Less and less individual thought exists every single day.

reply to post by playswithmachines

I posted the photo's on ATS media about a year ago, they have been removed.
So now they have been posted them here and this is a closeup.

Since English does not seem to be your native language, I will try to help you out. First of all, the links in your post lead to a Dutch MySpace page. If you posted the photos on ATS before, you can re-post them on this thread by following these instructions. Scroll to the top of this page and click on the "Tools" button. This takes you to your account page. At the upper left is a button labeled "Old Pics." Click on this and you will see all of the old photos you posted. Cut and paste them here. Simple.

As far as the video you made goes, I would like to point out that you need to add "Warning: Strong Language!" There are several problems. You claim that the Moon is hollow. It is not. This is a misunderstanding based on a geologist claiming that the Moon "rings like a bell." This does not mean it is hollow, it just means that its interior has fewer "layers" than the Earth, so it vibrates differently. You also post images that have been scanned, then manipulated to create artifacts. As has been shown on this thread, digitized images show "compression artifacts" when processed. See here for a simple demonstration:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You also enlarge very small sections of images so that the pixels form ambiguous shapes, then project interpretations like "robot head" onto them.

Yes, Mount Hadley is shiny enough to reflect laser light, although its slope would tend to reflect laser light away from the Earth. In any event, it is not nearly as reflective as the mirrors the astronauts placed there. Scientists have targeted these mirrors continuously for forty years, measuring the way the Moon has been receding from the Earth, which reminds me, the Moon's orbit isn't perfect. It is eccentric and growing larger all the time. Back to the reflectors. Imagine shining a flashlight at a cat in a dark room. Yes, you can see the cat's face, but the cat's eyes shine much, much brighter than the fur. The mirrors are like a cat's eyes shining in the dark.

Originally posted by playswithmachines
You want more?

Not at the moment, I am still waiting for the other images.

I suggest you use the new ATS uploads area.

reply to post by playswithmachines


You mention the Hubble and its defective lens if they had something to hide my bother fixing it!

Originally posted by BRITWARRIOR

Oh what and you seriously think the government uses technology that civilians do? NASA can land on the moon what can you do? can you get to the moon? when will you be able to land on the moon your self in wonder?

Most government programmes are 20 or more years more advanced then what they lead us the public to believe, the government spends billions on super computers, billions...

I would bet everything i own the government had a super computer more powerful then any home PC today in the 1970s,

Someone else who watches to much tv, CSI etc, tell us who makes the CPU's for computers then ? Your mobile phone way has more power than a 1970's super computer!

Have a look !

www.brew-wood.co.uk...




I will post an address for you to send everything you own

reply to post by OmegaLogos


Explanation: OL noticed that the pictures I tried to embedd [from offsite] resulted in them disapearing intermitantly and so I have screengrabbed and resized them and uploaded the altered jpgs to ATS.

All rights etc. to the ORIGINAL pictures belongs to 1967sander OK!









You can find the Originals linked by sander1967 in this post HERE!

Personal Disclosure: at the interwebs for forcing my hand!

Still very amazed at those pictures!

Originally posted by DJW001
You claim that the Moon is hollow. It is not.

Not tryin to ruffle your feathers any so my bad if I do (but I usually end up doin so haha), but I just have to say...
How does one have any definitive proof of whether the earth or the moon is or not hollow? Neither can be proven and is just a theory. Perhaps just as the earth was thought to be flat and the spherical theorists were ridiculed, it's possible that history is repeating itself. The man credited for the hollow earth theory in the past....few hundred years is Haley, same person who located Haley's Comet; it is interesting to note as well that Haley was Sir Isaac Newton's colleague or apprentice, so he was highly educated in science; not only Newton's, but Michio Kaku's theory on the behavior of gravity would work exceptionally well with a hollow earth theory and would actually better explain the behavior of earthquakes. IF the earth is hollow, there'd be holes on the North and South Poles, which would give a plausible new theory for why aurora borealis and it's counterpart can be seen closer to the poles because of the light given off from the core, or the black sun (almost even worshipped by the occult and even Hitler.)

This is a misunderstanding based on a geologist claiming that the Moon "rings like a bell."

The earth has been said to ring like a bell in the bible as well; when was the last time you saw a bell as we know it today or throughout history full of either molten and/or solid iron that rang properly? I'm sure there ARE exceptions but most bells I know of are fairly hollow.
Assuming the earth is hollow, every other planet and their moons would have to be assumed hollow as well. The elite or TPTB if you will would purposefully hide this fact from the populace...it all fits in perfectly with their agenda. Tied closely with the hollow earth theory is the history of Hitler and Antarctica, the disappearance of all of Germany's gold, their best machinary/technology, their best scientists, and 200,000 nearly genetically perfect Arians, and Hitler's sketchy death after WWII.

This does not mean it is hollow, it just means that its interior has fewer "layers" than the Earth, so it vibrates differently.

Yet another common thing I've been taught as well - but it is a theory and just as much unprovable. The hollow earth theory is a fascinating concept and I would encourage researching it. Not trying to say it's necessarily true BUT.... it is a scientifically plausible theory and is backed by folklore and popular media and movies that hint to it as well.

As for the OP,
Stemming from a puppet government full of lies would mean organizations such as NASA would also be a bag of lies and same with the public schools that would be teaching us lies where it counts to keep us stupid and in the dark.
Thus OP (you prolly won't see this but) I think the pictures you have exposed are very interesting yet considering how deep the rabbit trail goes not very surprising to me at all - keep up the good work Prolly caught up in researching you ain't got no time to be reading a million replies eh? haha

reply to post by Conspirus

I don't know why I'm getting involved here but....

The Earth just couldn't have the mass it does if it was hollow. It may have caverns that run very deep, it may not be exactly how Geologists suspect but HOLLOW?

reply to post by Conspirus


The Earth cannot be hollow. If it were it would not be able to have the Moon orbiting it as it does, all our tide calculations would be wrong, and plate tectonics would not have proof of existing. There is tons of evidence that supports it (earth) being a core with layers, and nothing at all to imply it is hollow.

The moon having been deemed to ring like a bell has nothing to do with it being hollow. A solid cylinder will emit a tone, if something vibrates, it emits a frequency,

This thread is based on no evidence at all.

Originally posted by ziggystrange
A solid cylinder will emit a tone, if something vibrates, it emits a frequency,

Apparently people forget that a tuning fork is not hollow.

reply to post by Pimander


Explanation: St*rred!

Completely correct on the mass issue ... and yes the earth is still HOLLOW!

Here is why ...

Is Planet Earth really Hollowed? (by ^anubis^ posted on 24-1-2010 @ 09:17 PM) [ATS]

And my post to that thread is HERE!

Originally posted by OmegaLogos

Originally posted by Phage
Nice clear day. Not a cloud in the Arctic sky. Wait! Where's Greenland? Europe? North America? That is not a real image.

This is:
www.ssec.wisc.edu...

Explanation: Thanks for the debunk on the OP's linked picture as the picture you link to is the 1st complete satellite picture of the arctic I have ever seen. St*r!

But then your post goes on and promotes ignorance ....

No. The Earth is not hollow.

That is NOT scientific FACT and HERE is WHY....

Atom size [wiki]

Atomic radius [wiki]

Yahoo Answers [answers.yahoo.com]

What % of an atom is empty? [physicsforums.com]

Wiki Answers [wiki.answers.com]

Hydrogen Atom Scale Model [phrenopolis.com]

Personal Disclosure:

So yeah...from a scientific POV the Earth is 99.9999999999999% HOLLOW!!!

P.S. Shame on the sycophants who starred you and didn't bring your shallow arguments flaws to your attention!

Personal Disclosure: What scale of science do you want to apply? Phage was correct as at our 1m/1s/1kg scale the earth for us [excepting caves] is not hollow but it CERTAINLY is at the ATOMIC scale which is at the nanometer/nanosecond/nanogram scale.

P.S. My extremely belated apologies to Phage as we are both correct and it depends on the scale from which one views the problem from! I was in a bad mood when I posted that and I regret any harm I caused!

reply to post by PrimePorkchop
You are aware that I provided debunking evidence of the OP theory, yes? In the very post you responded to? Yet for some reason you associate the theory with me and assert that I'm dodging your questions?

I was trying to demonstrate what I've found to be a more effective form of skepticism and some perspectives that are worth contemplating when jumping into something thinking you know everything you need to know. Your response to me demonstrates exactly the mannerisms I notice frequently. I'm sure you just got me mixed up with someone else, simple honest mistake of course. Right? It couldn't have anything to do with your approach to skepticism?

Also, a true skeptic is skeptical of what they think they know most of all.

Namaste.

reply to post by ziggystrange

Originally posted by ziggystrange
reply to post by Conspirus

 

The Earth cannot be hollow. If it were it would not be able to have the Moon orbiting it as it does, all our tide calculations would be wrong, and plate tectonics would not have proof of existing. There is tons of evidence that supports it (earth) being a core with layers, and nothing at all to imply it is hollow.

The moon having been deemed to ring like a bell has nothing to do with it being hollow. A solid cylinder will emit a tone, if something vibrates, it emits a frequency,

This thread is based on no evidence at all.

edit on 8-11-2011 by ziggystrange because: Fix typo

Your statements aren't correct. The orbit of the Moon is determined by the gravitational force between the Moon and the Earth (and the other extraterrestrial bodies in space technically). While gravity has a direct correlation with mass, there is no correlation between an object being solid or hollow. The gravitational force between two objects is dependent upon the distance between centers of both masses; a hollow sphere and a solid sphere have the same center of mass. Therefore, a hollow Earth is possible.

With regards to tide calculations, the same can be said as above. Tide calculations are dependent upon the effects of gravity from the Moon and Sun on the Earth. Being hollow or solid has no effect on gravity.

Now on to plate tectonics... Plate tectonics is a theory that describes the motion of the Earth's lithosphere (the crust and upper most mantle) not the "core". The driving force that causes this movement has not been determined. There are a lot of proposed causes of these movements, but none of them require the Earth to be solid.

The 'evidence' that exists doesn't really imply the Earth is solid either. The fact is, no exploratory well has been dug deeper than 12,290 m (Extended Reach Drilling). That’s 0.2% of the earth's diameter. No one really knows for a fact what the Earth's internal structure is like.

Frankly, scientists don’t know what causes gravity either (yes mass is related to gravity but it does not cause it). Could be gravitons, string theory, MOND, induced gravity, quantum gravity...

Kyo

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by ziggystrange
A solid cylinder will emit a tone, if something vibrates, it emits a frequency,

Apparently people forget that a tuning fork is not hollow.

Ah, but the frequency that a tuning fork emits is dependent upon the length of the prongs as well as cross sectional area, material and moment of inertia. All of these factors affect the resonant frequency of the object, and audible frequencies range from 20 to 20,000 Hz. A 'solid' and 'hollow' object will have two completely different resonant frequencies that may or may not be in that range. Sure solid objects emit resonant frequencies but they sure will be different than a hollow one.

NASA scientists have even said the moon rings like a bell. This is because seismic data from moon quakes have produced movement for longer than 10 minutes at times. This is highly uncharacteristic for a solid sphere.

Maybe when the bible was written, a bell was the closest object to compare it to...

Either way a bell is still 'solid', the shape (being "hollow") is what allows it to resonate for a longer duration.

Kyo

reply to post by ErgoTheConfusion


You have provided no evidence at all. you provided what you wanted us to see.

Nothing more.

reply to post by Pimander

I don't know why I'm getting involved here but....

It’s all good, I was only commenting on that chap for his somewhat condescending response to the other guy, I usually just peruse but felt like posting for a change

The Earth just couldn't have the mass it does if it was hollow. It may have caverns that run very deep, it may not be exactly how Geologists suspect but HOLLOW?

It does depend on which hollow earth theory you use, there are those who claim the earth isn’t completely hollow but just ‘substantially’ hollow. I don't mean empty mind you, as in my previous post I mention the black sun for example. Haley actually believed the earth has "levels" basically, if drawn would look like a circular target with the circles.

There is always a bigger dog, as the saying goes; everyone assumes we are at the tip top of scientific theories, knowledge, and findings, but those who thought the earth was flat thought so too in their time. It’s fairly hard to follow sometimes if your favorite subject wasn’t science or math like it is for me, but Michio Kaku has many plausible ground breaking theories on physics and gravity that are absolutely astounding, not what we’d normally think of things from the way we’ve learned, which definitely puts explaining the whole universe in a brand new light. I would say it’s more like a whole new level of thinking because it answers many questions about the universe previously asked to which there were no solutions before and generates new possibilities.

This could go on forever though and isn't really the topic of this thread though granted it has a commonality in that we are being lied to on multiple levels by beings who are pretending to care about our wellfare.

reply to post by ziggystrange

The Earth cannot be hollow. If it were it would not be able to have the Moon orbiting it as it does, all our tide calculations would be wrong, and plate tectonics would not have proof of existing.

Yes, assuming that our current theories on physics and gravity are the absolute truth in defining our universe. Why wouldn’t the moon orbit it if it were hollow? There would be new ways/methods of calculating tide and plate tectonics that wouldn’t pose any kind of threat to the newer theories of those sciences at all. BUT this isn’t the thread for this eh? And Kyobosha just explained it a step or two further scientifically than I could ya show off!

There is tons of evidence that supports it (earth) being a core with layers, and nothing at all to imply it is hollow.

Before you say that I suggest you do some more in depth research of your own. Do what your avatar says silly goose.
The hollow earth theory was actually the most popular amongst renown scientists around Newton’s time, then all of a sudden for almost no explanation at all it was either not passed on to the public at the time or just ignored altogether, like a flip of a light switch.

The moon having been deemed to ring like a bell has nothing to do with it being hollow. A solid cylinder will emit a tone, if something vibrates, it emits a frequency,

I agree, almost anything can be made to make a certain sound. But note, they wouldn’t have gone through the trouble of saying the earth and the moon ring “as a bell” but would have said they ring “as solid cylinders” instead. The frequency emitted from a solid bar or ball would sound totally different than sound waves resonating by echoing off inside a sphere or half a sphere or even 2 parallel bars not encased by anything, such as a tuning fork. As Kyo illustrated....puts my explanation to shame haha!

This thread is based on no evidence at all.

Which? The OP or my business one time post between DJW00? Well either way.
According to you, probably. But that’s ok, most people don’t want to believe that the universe as they perceive it isn’t what they’ve been programmed to believe, ignorance truly IS bliss.