It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Does NASA really know that there are artificial structures on the moon ?
page: 4share:
I'm pretty sure there is a Walmart and Mickey D's on the moon... but they're on the back side so we can't see them.
reply to post by arianna
Arianna, have you studied the geography of Mars and the Moon? Because I have
And seeing how you showed me a Pharaoh on a cliff on Mars that was completely nautral - only this shape resembles a pharaoh face all around it is rocks on one other than during impact have crashed into smaller pieces and with time became part of the cliff (and from what I see below this must be a partial picture of a crater). There was nothing artifical around your Pharaoh, meaning no ruins and it all means is a rock that looks like something known.
You are mistaken, again. It's the same with the Moon.
That's the meaning of objectivity that I follow and is my approach. Whatever they are hiding are hiding, I am not certain the stories about aliens are true but you know, so many documents I cannot exclude a possibility and whatever is NOT is NOT such as these artefacts or natural formations on the Moon/Mars
And yes I know you mean the figure that starts from the 2969th pixel from top to the bottom and 3264th pixel from the left to the right.
Arianna, have you studied the geography of Mars and the Moon? Because I have
And seeing how you showed me a Pharaoh on a cliff on Mars that was completely nautral - only this shape resembles a pharaoh face all around it is rocks on one other than during impact have crashed into smaller pieces and with time became part of the cliff (and from what I see below this must be a partial picture of a crater). There was nothing artifical around your Pharaoh, meaning no ruins and it all means is a rock that looks like something known.
You are mistaken, again. It's the same with the Moon.
That's the meaning of objectivity that I follow and is my approach. Whatever they are hiding are hiding, I am not certain the stories about aliens are true but you know, so many documents I cannot exclude a possibility and whatever is NOT is NOT such as these artefacts or natural formations on the Moon/Mars
And yes I know you mean the figure that starts from the 2969th pixel from top to the bottom and 3264th pixel from the left to the right.
edit
on 27-7-2012 by Imtor because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by arianna
Here we go more zoomed in NO detail BS pictures
That's correct wmd_2008, some more very close images showing a large structure on the moon. The camera doesn't lie does it?
What's the problem in accepting the truth?
Could it possibly be that you're a believer in the scientific agencies telling everyone that there's nothing on the moon except some redundant mission hardware? If you are thinking this way, maybe you should look right into the lunar images then you may possibly see some amazing features.
Still we have no high definition images of the moon from the Japanese or the Chinese! The images from these agencies were supposed to be the best yet. They are definitely hiding what is really on the moon. What is more relevant is that some of us know why they are hiding this vital HD photographic data..
reply to post by arianna
I've observed the Moon with large telescopes and there are no artifical structures there... Believe whatever you want, the truth is you are fantacising from natural formations.
I've observed the Moon with large telescopes and there are no artifical structures there... Believe whatever you want, the truth is you are fantacising from natural formations.
Originally posted by Imtor
reply to post by arianna
I've observed the Moon with large telescopes and there are no artifical structures there... Believe whatever you want, the truth is you are fantacising from natural formations.
When you have some time to spare have a look at this video. It's very well done and contains some interesting surface detail. It may possibly persuade you to change your mind about structures on the moon.
youtu.be...
reply to post by arianna
Arianna, you seem like a nice person. Please step away from the monitor, go outside and look at the actual Moon.
When you have some time to spare have a look at this video. It's very well done and contains some interesting surface detail. It may possibly persuade you to change your mind about structures on the moon.
Arianna, you seem like a nice person. Please step away from the monitor, go outside and look at the actual Moon.
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by arianna
When you have some time to spare have a look at this video. It's very well done and contains some interesting surface detail. It may possibly persuade you to change your mind about structures on the moon.
Arianna, you seem like a nice person. Please step away from the monitor, go outside and look at the actual Moon.
I do not need to go outside and view the moon. On a clear night when the moon is high in the sky it looks a very bright silvery-grey colour. You should not be deceived by this appearance as the reflected light is intense. The high degree of reflected sunlight is masking the low-level real colour reflections.
Have you viewed the video at the link shown above?
reply to post by arianna
I know that this will come as something of a shock to you, but what we call "color" is an illusion. The human eye has three receptors that are most sensitive in three bands of wavelengths. There are colors that the human eye cannot "see" between the ones we can*. It is as if we can't hear the black keys on a piano. Electronic sensors can "see" these colors, and represent them to us in a way that allows us to see them. That's about as simple as I can make it. The "live" images of the Moon in the video were taken with a neutral density filter, the stills were made using a process known as "stacking." If we had electronic eyes, we could see the Moon splashed with color, as different minerals reflect different wavelengths more strongly than others. As it is, all we can really see is grey.
*Or, rather, we "see" them only dimly.
I do not need to go outside and view the moon. On a clear night when the moon is high in the sky it looks a very bright silvery-grey colour. You should not be deceived by this appearance as the reflected light is intense. The high degree of reflected sunlight is masking the low-level real colour reflections.
I know that this will come as something of a shock to you, but what we call "color" is an illusion. The human eye has three receptors that are most sensitive in three bands of wavelengths. There are colors that the human eye cannot "see" between the ones we can*. It is as if we can't hear the black keys on a piano. Electronic sensors can "see" these colors, and represent them to us in a way that allows us to see them. That's about as simple as I can make it. The "live" images of the Moon in the video were taken with a neutral density filter, the stills were made using a process known as "stacking." If we had electronic eyes, we could see the Moon splashed with color, as different minerals reflect different wavelengths more strongly than others. As it is, all we can really see is grey.
*Or, rather, we "see" them only dimly.
The moon landing was faked, according to this analysis of the movie "The Shining" - fascinating.
The theory that makes the most sense to me is that we did go to the moon, but most of the footage was not shown to the public due to a preponderance of ET structures on the moon and UFO's buzzing around the moon mission, thus additional footage needed to be created on earth. That is why everyone is chasing their tail on this one. Both events happened, an actual moon landing, and faked footage filmed in Nevada.
Also, the argument that we couldn't have done it with calculator like computing power doesn't hold water, if Nazi's were able to send V2's to London with slide rulers.
Here is the analysis of Stanley Kubricks "The Shining", you will never look at this movie the same way again:
The theory that makes the most sense to me is that we did go to the moon, but most of the footage was not shown to the public due to a preponderance of ET structures on the moon and UFO's buzzing around the moon mission, thus additional footage needed to be created on earth. That is why everyone is chasing their tail on this one. Both events happened, an actual moon landing, and faked footage filmed in Nevada.
Also, the argument that we couldn't have done it with calculator like computing power doesn't hold water, if Nazi's were able to send V2's to London with slide rulers.
Here is the analysis of Stanley Kubricks "The Shining", you will never look at this movie the same way again:
Originally posted by arianna
When you have some time to spare have a look at this video. It's very well done and contains some interesting surface detail. It may possibly persuade you to change your mind about structures on the moon.
youtu.be...
Hey Arianna - isn't this a fascinating video on the moon? I'm working my way though it, I guess it was just released last week! There must be a thread on it somewhere here..................
CELESTIAL - THE MOON VIDEO - everything you wanted to know about the moon but were afraid to ask (or other stuff NASA isn't telling us)
Originally posted by DJW001
I know that this will come as something of a shock to you, but what we call "color" is an illusion. The human eye has three receptors that are most sensitive in three bands of wavelengths. There are colors that the human eye cannot "see" between the ones we can*. It is as if we can't hear the black keys on a piano. Electronic sensors can "see" these colors, and represent them to us in a way that allows us to see them. That's about as simple as I can make it. The "live" images of the Moon in the video were taken with a neutral density filter, the stills were made using a process known as "stacking." If we had electronic eyes, we could see the Moon splashed with color, as different minerals reflect different wavelengths more strongly than others. As it is, all we can really see is grey.
*Or, rather, we "see" them only dimly.
Did you know that the "Pineal gland" aka "third eye", is the only other organ in the human body to contain photoreceptor cells?
reply to post by PlanetXisHERE
That is not exactly correct. The ipRGCs are located in the eye, slightly in front of the rods and cones. These ganglia cells are, in fact, wired to the pineal to regulate circadian rhythms.
Did you know that the "Pineal gland" aka "third eye", is the only other organ in the human body to contain photoreceptor cells?
That is not exactly correct. The ipRGCs are located in the eye, slightly in front of the rods and cones. These ganglia cells are, in fact, wired to the pineal to regulate circadian rhythms.
To all the viewers who say there are no structures or colour on the surface of the moon, take a look at this strip image and the three larger
sectional views at the links below.
With this type of evidence it is hard to comprehend why many people still say there's nothing on the moon except rocks and craters.
Image ref: AS17-150-23087
Direct sectional views:
i985.photobucket.com...
i985.photobucket.com...
i985.photobucket.com...
With this type of evidence it is hard to comprehend why many people still say there's nothing on the moon except rocks and craters.
Image ref: AS17-150-23087
Direct sectional views:
i985.photobucket.com...
i985.photobucket.com...
i985.photobucket.com...
Originally posted by arianna
Direct sectional views:
i985.photobucket.com...
i985.photobucket.com...
i985.photobucket.com...
What exactly am I looking at?
Not being rude, just dunno what's special exactly and don't know the history behind the pics.
reply to post by Pinke
If you look right into the larger images at the links you should be able to see many structures. There are also many statues that appear to be heads. Some of these statues appear to be near human-like whilst others seem to be animal heads. If you look very carefully, there is a form of infrastructure. Also, investigate the features inside the craters.
Looking at these images with a powerful optical magnifyer helps. If you download the images, do not use digital zoom as this only makes recognition of the structures and other features more difficult to observe.
If you look right into the larger images at the links you should be able to see many structures. There are also many statues that appear to be heads. Some of these statues appear to be near human-like whilst others seem to be animal heads. If you look very carefully, there is a form of infrastructure. Also, investigate the features inside the craters.
Looking at these images with a powerful optical magnifyer helps. If you download the images, do not use digital zoom as this only makes recognition of the structures and other features more difficult to observe.