Apollo 9: Gigantic Cilindrical Objects caught in front of the Moon...

reply to post by JimOberg


yes, multiple photographs from several independent sources would of course be better evidence. one photograph, or video, or eyewitness testimony need not be considered "proof" of aliens. what's your personal threshold? how many other moon photos have you examined from that day?

reply to post by Arken


Holy cow good catch OP. S and F for ya. Gonna be looking into this. I absolutely love UFO stories. I want to believe!

Soylent Green Is People
I pointed out I thought was a crosshair, and I explained why the horizontal component was more visible than the vertical (due to horizontal blur).

First of all, I doubt the astronaut could point the Hasselblad through the sextant's telescope. Second, if it was able to do it, I don't think the crosshair (or any other line on the sextant's visor) would show in a 80mm lens focused to the Moon.

My reasoning also attempts to explain why the Moon looked magnified (it was too big in that image to be taken from Earth's orbit with a normal camera)...

I don't think the Moon is too big in that photo for a photo taken with a 80mm lens. Don't look just at the size of the Moon, look at it as a percentage of photo's size.

reply to post by ArMaP

First of all, I doubt the astronaut could point the Hasselblad through the sextant's telescope.

I was wondering about that. Is there a large mismatch in sizing between the two?

If I were up there, I'd probably try it out for fun.

JimOberg
Point is, there are millions of photos taken from Earth, even most of them a little closer to the moon than Apollo-9' view. Any of them are as good a view as this mission got, so why present it as it were a superior data source?

Personally speaking, it's a crap picture. You can look with your eyeballs and see more outline detail.
Therefore I've not much idea about the, "Three cylindrical objects" there could be hundreds of objects there, or just three cylinder looking objects, just as we do know NOW that the rings of Saturn are made up of debris, and not high speed multi monorail train rails, (as good a simile as any other) if you don't know. I looked at a good deal of the other pictures just by changing the URL number, all the camera dirt and fluff is visible in the ones I looked at, and none are related to the "three"
It doesn't much look like a photocopy issue either, but is possible the image shows a dusting of carbon black to complicate things. So it could be that, or it could be a troupe of asteroids passing by or in orbit round the Moon or the Earth then, or whatever.
The real point is about romantics, however here, neither I nor you or Arken, actually know about that picture. However, Arken did use the picture properly, and got beat up for it, wrongly.

Arken
Astonishing anomalies came from NASA archive. Something is slipped out? In this image by Apollo 9 mission eol.jsc.nasa.gov... appear three gigantic cilindrical objects right in front of the lunar disc.

Thanks to streetcap1.

The same kind of Cilindrical Objects caught near the Rings of Saturn?

edit on 27-10-2013 by Arken because: (no reason given)

Dont Forget this Also !


The Phobos II Incident, January 1989
www.ufocasebook.com...

Phobos 2 Martian UFO Encounter
www.ancient-code.com...#



From the Movie Dune !!


www.ancient-code.com...


www.ancient-code.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">www.ancient-code.com... g








hmm interesting ! ! Ring makers of Mars

Using this source: eol.jsc.nasa.gov...

Just playing around with two *exact* copies next to each other on screen. Goofing around with the brightness, contrast and color saturation. I did not adjust the temperature, tint or sharpness.

I am using the "Preview" for Mac OSX which has only a few standard, color slider adjustments.

The digital copy of AS09-23-3500 that came off that .gov server is not a pristine scan of the negative. The server file AS09-23-3500.JPG has already been *digitally enhanced* by NASA, and there is a box clearly around the moon which gives it that game away.

Image on the left is unchanged, image on the right has been adjusted in brightness, contrast and saturation.

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


What kind of changes did you do? I cannot see anything like that.

Urantia1111
reply to post by JimOberg

 

yes, multiple photographs from several independent sources would of course be better evidence. one photograph, or video, or eyewitness testimony need not be considered "proof" of aliens. what's your personal threshold? how many other moon photos have you examined from that day?

So is it your contention that there WERE other observations of such shapes on the moon that day, and the witnesses just haven't gotten around to disclosing them yet?

ArMaP

Soylent Green Is People
I pointed out I thought was a crosshair, and I explained why the horizontal component was more visible than the vertical (due to horizontal blur).

First of all, I doubt the astronaut could point the Hasselblad through the sextant's telescope. Second, if it was able to do it, I don't think the crosshair (or any other line on the sextant's visor) would show in a 80mm lens focused to the Moon...

Maybe not, but I still think I can see a vertical component to those lines (albeit a blurred vertical component) -- which makes it look like crosshairs. If they are crosshairs, I'm not sure where they are from, because the other images taken by that same camera and that same film magazine (magazine 23/D) did not have any crosshairs in them.

TheWhiteKnight

cheesy
If it L shape then we are screw..
Very interesting Sir..
Hope someone can explain it..it very Huge!
SnF

Can you explain why we are screwed, if it is L shaped?

I do not understand the reasoning. What connections, specifically, are you implying?

# 75

its about L shape Object That Wistleblower say Behind The Moon..in the recent thread sir..

JimOberg

Urantia1111
reply to post by JimOberg

 

yes, multiple photographs from several independent sources would of course be better evidence. one photograph, or video, or eyewitness testimony need not be considered "proof" of aliens. what's your personal threshold? how many other moon photos have you examined from that day?

So is it your contention that there WERE other observations of such shapes on the moon that day, and the witnesses just haven't gotten around to disclosing them yet?

if there were, i think it's plausible that the takers/owners of those images wouldn't necessarily notice anything strange about them. look how long it took someone to spot the anomalies in this one. moreover, unless someone took a photo of the moon at the same moment this one was taken AND from a near identical vantage point, they may not have captured these alien spaceships in their photo.

so i noticed you ignored my question: what is your personal threshold for belief in aliens, short of personal encounter?

ArMaP
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter

 

What kind of changes did you do? I cannot see anything like that.

Hi ArMaP!
Let's agree on the baseline characteristics of the image as it is served directly off the server in .JPG format.



Here is what happens with a few very quick adjustments to the sliders ::: but you should really SLIDE THEM and not set them to see the boxes when they come out.


I suspect it's .JPG coding artifacts. But what do you think of the color levels on the original?

Arken
Astonishing anomalies came from NASA archive. Something is slipped out? In this image by Apollo 9 mission eol.jsc.nasa.gov... appear three gigantic cilindrical objects right in front of the lunar disc.

One thing that does jump out at me from this image that may argue against 3 cylindrical objects is the angle of the objects relative to the camera's position and the moon. They seem to all be "tilted" at the exact same angle and perfectly parallel to each other which seems to be uncanny and/or one helluva job of good piloting if they are indeed independent, freely moving objects.

A more likely explanation for that would be related to a film anomaly or image artifact, or something on the lens or viewport.

On the other hand, if you stare at this thing long enough you can see almost anything.

Your mileage may vary, void where prohibited, etc...

Isolating some colors... just for fun.

Urantia1111
so i noticed you ignored my question: what is your personal threshold for belief in aliens, short of personal encounter?

Fair question, already answered here:
www.jamesoberg.com...

I wouldn't trust a raw personal encounter, nobody should, since it is generally recognized that >>95% of perceptions are misinterpreted prosaic stimuli. If 'seeing were believing', 19 times out of 20 -- maybe 20 times out of 20 -- the witness would be believing unjustifiably. Sorry, but those are very bad odds.

I see a 2-dimensional photograph with 3-dimensional raised lines across it. If you look at the image close up, it appears to be on the actual photograph. The highlighted portions of the lines seem consistent with the lighting on the moon in the photo. The highlights bleed into the photo. Maybe cuts like mentioned, creases, or indentations from underneath. Or possibly digital artifacts. It doesn't look like objects floating above the moon.

Before you even consider some type of alien spacecraft, you have to eliminate the realistic possibilities first. You can't combine the still unproven UFO/alien theory, with other proven grounded ones and make them equally plausible.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

Maybe not, but I still think I can see a vertical component to those lines (albeit a blurred vertical component) -- which makes it look like crosshairs. If they are crosshairs, I'm not sure where they are from, because the other images taken by that same camera and that same film magazine (magazine 23/D) did not have any crosshairs in them.

I'm thinking they took one shot and one shot only.

There is only one shot of the moon on that magazine... or on any other one for that matter.

Soylent Green Is People
I wish I could find an actual picture of the Command Module's sextant/telescope. All I could find online was this recreation of it (this is an illustration -- NOT a real picture of the sextant). That being said, in this illustration of the sextant, you can see the crosshairs I am talking about:

Image Source: www.geocities.jp...

I think maybe the astronaut held the camera up to the sextant eyepiece.

edit on 10/27/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

If this were the case and the lines we are seeing are part of the sextant crosshair, wouldn't the line on the left be notched at regular intervals like the left crosshair line in the illustration? All three lines seem fairly uniform; if what you're positing is correct, I'd expect to see a marked difference between the line on the left and the other two.

Personally, if I look closely, I can see lighter tones near the upper edges of the lines that would indicate to me some sort of curvature and depth, similar to what's seen in this picture-

Airplane at Night Picture

It helps if you look at the high res photo here- (Thanks for the link Soylent!)

Apollo 9 AS09-23-3500 High Resolution

That said, it is a very old picture and it does take a fair degree of imagination to visualize the curvature I'm talking about. That's not to say it's a fantasy, only that I can also definitely see the angle and point-of-view our left-brained friends. Of course, I do realize that the whole left-brain right-brain thing is a seriously flawed concept, but it makes for an easy descriptor.

JimOberg
Arken, please stop injuring people by making them fall off their chairs laughing so hard.

Clue: There WAS no "Apollo-9 moon mission". Did you really think there had been?

At least Arken's a gentleman on these boards, Jim. You? Now, I'm laughing.