What's going on in Copernicus crater?

Originally posted by arianna
Even in this feint image the structural anomaly on the rim of the crater can be observed. There is no doubt about it.

To me it looks like a small crater on the rim of the large crater.

reply to post by arianna

Firstly I would ask, can you do any better?

I am not the one claiming there are buildings, statues, and other artificial structures on the moon, you are.

You seem to be a rather impatient person and want results immediately.

Not really. You started this thread 6 and a half months ago and have yet to provide any evidence at all for your claims.

Yes, I will agree with you that the moon has many craters and a number of them are definitely artificial. Now I know you will not agree with that statement, but it's true. There are also many small conical pits that are artificial. Some of the pits have statues in them.

How in the world can you state as fact that some of the craters are "artificial"? How can you state that there are statues? What's the point of sticking a statue at the bottom of a pit? Doesn't that defeat the purpose? Again I remind you that you have given absolutely no proof for this in over six months of your trying to continue this thread.

I have now researched the area in question and can tell you that there are thousands of structures showing on the surface.

And what led you to your conclusions?

Over-enlarged pixelated false color images and heaping helpings of imagination?

Any other proof or evidence beyond your "beliefs"?

reply to post by arianna

I am sure one of the main reasons why people cannot spot these structural features is due to the fact that the indigenous population are 'masters of deception'.

"Masters of deception", eh? I feel at times that this thread may have been started by one of them.

In the oblique view it can be observed that some of these representations would seem to be large head statues These type of statues can also be observed at many other lunar locations.

Are any of these "other lunar locations" possibly discernible as artificial by anyone else than you?

If so, please show an example of an obvious statue or building that we can all agree on to see where you are getting your ideas from.

If anyone wishes to study the following couple of images with a powerful magnifyer they should first make sure they are sitting comfortably and well strapped in, just in case they become completely overwhelmed at what is showing in the view.

Why is it that Arizona State cannot produce an image like this?

reply to post by arianna

Used a magnifier like you suggested. (although I feel that progressively worsens the quality of the image the more it is magnified)

Still failed to see anything artificial.

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by arianna

 

Used a magnifier like you suggested. (although I feel that progressively worsens the quality of the image the more it is magnified)

Still failed to see anything artificial.

That's what I thought you'd say so it comes as no surprise.

Using a magnifyer does not degrade the view. It only enlarges it. May I suggest you study the image for a while. Take your time and then you may start to see some of the fantastic features. The large object shown in the images above is plain to see in these images.

Here's a couple of clues to aid recognition of the features.

How many representations of human-like faces do you see?

Do you see any representations of animals?

Originally posted by arianna
If anyone wishes to study the following couple of images with a powerful magnifyer they should first make sure they are sitting comfortably and well strapped in, just in case they become completely overwhelmed at what is showing in the view.

Why is it that Arizona State cannot produce an image like this?

edit on 31-7-2012 by arianna because: text

Because the LROC is producing pictures of much, much higher resolution and quality than what you are showing. The LROC has a resolution of up to 0.5 meters per pixel. That's half a meter per pixel.

The old photograph you are using has a much lower resolution in the range of 10s to 100s of meters per pixel.

The photo's you are showing in your post have also had the false coloring removed by desaturating it, and then has the grey scale level adjusted to bring out more contrast than you would normally see if you looked at it with the naked eye.
When one does this, especially with a low resolution picture, it is possible to introduce artifacts into the picture (and when I say "artifacts" I mean pixel errors or pixel data that is incorrect).

While your argument that the LROC pictures are from a birds eye view (top down) and this picture is at an angle, the fact remains that even in the LROC pictures, the sun light is at an angle, enabling objects that are above the flat ground to cast shadows. In other words: top down would still show structures just fine.

Considering the LROC was able to show the Apollo lunar lander, as small as they were, I'm sure any other structures would show if they where there. But let us take a look at that:

The LROC orbits around the moon with a average height of about 31 miles (50 km), but it can dip as low as 25 km.
Here is a screen shot of some well known structures here on Earth from about 31 miles up, with the unaided eye:



Now, let us zoom in to about 0.5 meter resolution:



Now.....I would dare say that if there were any structures on the moon at least the size of a SUV, the LROC would pick them up just fine.

You did say that these structures are hidden however by "masters of deception". That brings into question then how you are able to see them, but no one else can.

reply to post by eriktheawful


What they are doing is hiding many of their structures under designed constructional facial representations.

Here is a larger image of the above. Every square centimeter of this image should be studied for a time to recognize and view some amazing structural features.


i985.photobucket.com...

Originally posted by arianna
Why is it that Arizona State cannot produce an image like this?

Because images like that are useless. What's the point of taking high resolution photo to then change them into a photocopy-like image?

There seems to be a lot of pictures of pixelated rocks and everyone agrees that no structures are in these pictures....except for one person who sees faces and structures....also, why can't the focus be on just one photo? Lots of jumping to more photos of nothing.

Why does just one person see these things? no ammount of reasoning seems to convince them that nothing is there. Why has this thread suddenly come back...and with a vengence? Seems unlikely that anything will come of this...just a repeating pattern...kinda obvious....

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by arianna

 

I am sure one of the main reasons why people cannot spot these structural features is due to the fact that the indigenous population are 'masters of deception'.

"Masters of deception", eh? I feel at times that this thread may have been started by one of them.

In the oblique view it can be observed that some of these representations would seem to be large head statues These type of statues can also be observed at many other lunar locations.

Are any of these "other lunar locations" possibly discernible as artificial by anyone else than you?

If so, please show an example of an obvious statue or building that we can all agree on to see where you are getting your ideas from.

edit on 7/31/2012 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)

Maybe I am one of 'them' and that is why I can recognize certain features in images that others cannot see or do not want to see. You say you used a magnifying glass to view the images an do not see anything that appears as structures. Maybe many people have been 'conditioned' and that is why they do not see the structures and other features but I can assure you they are there if you observe closely.

Yes, others have found statues, in fact very tall statues. See video below.

youtu.be...

Originally posted by arianna
Yes, others have found statues, in fact very tall statues. See video below.

youtu.be...

I was expecting that video.

From what you have said in a previous post, I think you understand the difference between a photo that was taken vertically (or almost) over the target and one that is taken more from the side; the first one appears flat while the second shows perspective.

The "statue" from the video appears (to some) in Clementine photos, photos that were taken almost vertically over the target, so the "statue" is either lying down or it's not really a statue.

This is what it looks like in the Clementine photos.
(sorry for the external images, but they are too big to upload to ATS)


This is what it looks like in Kaguya/Selene photo with a much better resolution.

Originally posted by arianna
If anyone wishes to study the following couple of images with a powerful magnifyer they should first make sure they are sitting comfortably and well strapped in, just in case they become completely overwhelmed at what is showing in the view.

Why is it that Arizona State cannot produce an image like this?

edit on 31-7-2012 by arianna because: text

They wouldn't because they are CR4P thats why, I hope the few posts above by Armap, eriktheawful etc will finally show that the ONLY person mistaken in what they see and want to see is YOU!!!

reply to post by wmd_2008


I am very sorry mate, but you just do not know what you are talking about with reference to the images I have posted. Soon everyone will see that what I have posted is not CR4P as you put it.

Originally posted by arianna
The green rectangle in this image is the area under investigation. I will post some images of this area later.

The yellow arrow is pointing to what appears to be a large arch-like structure. The red arrow is pointing to a structure in a crater.

TOTAL and utter BS how much more of this are we going to see why do you provide a link to the areas say on an LRO image so we can compare, you are seeing things that are not there.

reply to post by Chamberf=6


In reply to your post above here is a nearview image showing the surface detail within the section marked with a green rectangle which can be seen in a previous image.

There are no compression artifacts showing or pixelization in this image, just the detail. Many of the structures in this view are very closely grouped. You will also probably note how this civilization integrate art into their urban structural features. There are also some head statues to be observed if you study the image. I will post another image later showing the features that I can see in the image.

The full view can be seen at the Direct link below.






Direct view:

i985.photobucket.com...

reply to post by arianna


OVER PROCESSED yet again there is NO detail there

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by arianna

 

OVER PROCESSED yet again there is NO detail there

No, not over processed at all, but careful enhancement to bring out the detail. There is a fantastic amount of detail showing in the image if you examine it closely. This image is a vast improvement on the original high resolution download and is much closer to what I would expect the quality to be for captures produced by modern digital photographic equipment.

I do not know what your problem is wmd_2008 but it seems to me that for some reason you do not want the truth to be known of exactly what is on the lunar surface. Do you work for one of the space institutions - if so, which one?

Originally posted by arianna
reply to post by wmd_2008

 

I am very sorry mate, but you just do not know what you are talking about with reference to the images I have posted. Soon everyone will see that what I have posted is not CR4P as you put it.

edit on 2-8-2012 by arianna because: (no reason given)

How soon?

Been nearly nine months and it's still a bunch of nonsense.

reply to post by arianna


No I am from the UK and work in the building trade but as photography has been my hobby for 30+ yrs know I can see when people like YOU dont really have a clue what you are doing to an image.

Take this for instance


i985.photobucket.com...

Can you post a link to the picture before you *&^%£" it up