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.

 

Gigantic structures on the front side of the moon + other 'anomalies'

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 03:46 PM
link   
with all the evidence we are being lied too about everything and NASA played a leading role in fooling the public into thinking there's nothing there except dead rock, airbrushing moon/mars structures from the begining, with multiple whitleblowers confirming it..you are pointing me to the LCR for data?? you must be joking. if dispite the noted facts you are not mad at NASA and all of the space agencies for that matter for denying the truth to the humanity, what's there to be said except it's sad how blind you are.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 



edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   

tachyonator7
with all the evidence we are being lied too about everything and NASA played a leading role in fooling the public into thinking there's nothing see, airbrushing moon/mars structures from the begining, with multiple whitleblowers confirming it..you are pointing me to the LCR for data?? you must be joking. if dispite the noted facts you are not mad at NASA and all of the space agencies for that matter for denying the truth to the humanity, what's there to be said except it's sad state of things.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 




So there's a grand conspiracy to cover up massive structures that you just pulled off Google Earth?



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 03:52 PM
link   

tachyonator7
with all the evidence we are being lied too about everything and NASA played a leading role in fooling the public into thinking there's nothing there except dead rock, airbrushing moon/mars structures from the begining, with multiple whitleblowers confirming it..you are pointing me to the LCR for data?? you must be joking. if dispite the noted facts you are not mad at NASA and all of the space agencies for that matter for denying the truth to the humanity, what's there to be said except it's sad how blind you are.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 



edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)

edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)


Got those hands over your ears going LA-LA-LA-LA, eh?


Enjoy your bliss.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:02 PM
link   

tachyonator7
with all the evidence we are being lied too about everything and NASA played a leading role in fooling the public into thinking there's nothing see, airbrushing moon/mars structures from the begining, with multiple whitleblowers confirming it..you are pointing me to the LCR for data?? you must be joking. if dispite the noted facts you are not mad at NASA and all of the space agencies for that matter for denying the truth to the humanity, what's there to be said except it's sad how blind you are.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 



edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)


So all of your evidence is based on the the low-res pictures that have been publicly available for years, and all of the hi-res pictures can't be trusted because they could be hiding what you allege is "the truth".

Don't you feel that possibly your are conveniently ignoring the better resolution images simply because they don't support your pre-conceived notion that "something must be there" (i.e., are you just saying "I'll ignore and/or dismiss "out-of-hand" any evidence that doesn't support what I feel is true")?
If NASA were going to airbrush stuff out of their imagery, don't you think the NASA imagery you used would have also had the evidence airbrushed away?

Why wasn't it airbrushed from those images? Plus, what makes you certain the higher-res images from the LROC have had the "structures" airbrushed away? The University of Arizona runs the LROC. Are you saying they did the airbrushing, or was it NASA?

Not only that, but the images you DID use still just look like craters. Could you please explain in detail how those craters and crater rims are "structures" (and by "structures", I suppose you mean of the artificial variety).


edit on 3/12/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by tachyonator7
 


Yup, just more craters. The moon and mars are just full of vast nothingness, rocks, hills, mountains, craters, and aliens.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:14 PM
link   
i'd be glad to eleborate on the all of the pictures but if you see nothing but craters as you said it is pretty pointeless isn't it?


Soylent Green Is People

tachyonator7
with all the evidence we are being lied too about everything and NASA played a leading role in fooling the public into thinking ...

edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:23 PM
link   

tachyonator7
9/10 of the links you posted are broken. and how do you expect to find confirmations for this finding from the major agencies. the only way to confirm it would be to go and see it through some big telecscope yourself.


onebigmonkey
I'm a great believer in looking at all the sources I can for this kind of thing, and this generally includes better telescopes and better images...


Google them then - they are long links, so if they don't work you can blame the forum software not me.

Lunar Orbiter Images can be found at the Apollo Image Atlas, moonviews.com and wikipedia.

Apollo images are available from a variety of sources, not hard to find.

Astronomers' images can be found with a simple google search, as can the LRO quickmap viewer and Chang'e-2 viewer.

Do some work of your own and get better quality images that will prove your point instead of relying on a really low resolution image and a desperate hope that no-one will check what you're claiming.

Oh, and I do have a telescope of my own.

e2a - Just to prove a point about your accuracy, only 3 of the links I posted didn't work.
edit on 12-3-2014 by onebigmonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   
If there was anything artificial on the moon on the side we can see, there would be enough people with equipment to proof it
edit on 12-3-2014 by kauskau because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:31 PM
link   

tachyonator7
i'd be glad to eleborate on the all of the pictures but if you see nothing but craters as you said it is pretty pointeless isn't it?


OK. If you feel that dialogue is pointless, then I'll post some images, and hopefully you will respond.

Here is a picture of Eudoxus Crater (on the left; Aristoteles Crater is on the right) taken by an amateur astronomer using a ground-based telescope. I don't see a "coliseum"-looking structure, as you asserted. I see a crater. Please show me the coliseum that you allege is there.



Image Source


Here is another image by another amateur astronomer using a telescope (Eudoxus on the bottom; Aristoteles on the top). There is also the rim of what looks like a very ancient crater to the left of the two craters (probably filled in by ejecta dust from subsequent impacts):



Image Source


edit on 3/12/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   
the photo of on the wikipedia moon page is the only one that shows this structures quite obviously. are you now claiming wikipedia photograph is fake and some amateur from unkown source is truthful?


Soylent Green Is People

edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:45 PM
link   
there are no "better quality images" that will show you these structures except in the early orbiter missions before heavy airbrushing, so you seem more desperate trying to debunk my claims relying on fake "high quallity" images like clementine or whatever.


onebigmonkey
Do some work of your own and get better quality images that will prove your point instead of relying on a really low resolution image and a desperate hope that no-one will check what you're claiming.



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:48 PM
link   

tachyonator7
the photo of on the wikipedia moon page is the only one that shows this structures quite obviously. are you now claiming wikipedia photograph is fake and some amateur from unkown source is truthful?


Could you please show me which Wikipedia image of Eudoxus crater you mean, so I can respond accurately?

And the images I posted may be from "unheard-of" amateurs, but the sources are not "unknown", considering I linked to those sources. There are many, many images from amateur astronomers of Eudoxus online, and if wikipedia has an hi-res, close up, and detailed image (similar to these amateur images) of Eudoxus showing a coliseum-like structure, I'd like to see it.




edit on 3/12/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
and since you mentioned Chang'e-2, here's one of it's shots



reply to post by onebigmonkey
 



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 04:53 PM
link   



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 05:02 PM
link   

tachyonator7
and since you mentioned Chang'e-2, here's one of it's shots




That image has been shown to NOT be from Chang'e but from an earlier NASA image (taken 45 years earlier). The image that is claimed to be form Chang'e is really the NASA image that someone has tampered with.

Here is an earlier discussion about that image:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 05:07 PM
link   
i've heared that, so you are dismissing it because it's and old nasa photo and not chang'e 2. and did you take look at the wikipedia photograph?


Soylent Green Is People

tachyonator7
and since you mentioned Chang'e-2, here's one of it's shots




That image has been shown to NOT be from Chang'e but from an earlier NASA image (taken 45 years earlier). The image that is claimed to be form Chang'e is really the NASA image that someone has tampered with.

Here is an earlier discussion about that image:
www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 05:09 PM
link   

tachyonator7
here you go: upload.wikimedia.org...


I thought you meant an image of the crater. Obviously an image of the entire Moon in which you try to zoom in on one small crater will not show the appropriate detail as an image through a more powerful telescope.



By the way, here is the Wikipedia image of a close-up of Eudoxus:


This image was taken by NASA's Lunar Orbiter 4. The odd-looking circular feature to the the upper left of the crater is a flaw in the images from Lunar Orbiter 4. These images were processed (printed on photographic paper) on-board the spacecraft in an automated darkroom, and then those print images were digitally transmitted to earth. Many Lunar 4 images have similar film-processing flaws.


edit on 3/12/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 05:14 PM
link   
i asked you for a comment on the wikipedia moon photograph, not for another 'more zoomed in' photo. if you don't know you can use CTRL & + to zoom in on it.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 



edit on 12-3-2014 by tachyonator7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 05:17 PM
link   

tachyonator7
i've heared that, so you are dismissing it because it's and old nasa photo and not chang'e 2.


Well, no. I'm saying that the image that is supposed to be a lunar base taken in 2012 is actually a photo taken in 1967 that has been tampered with to make it look like a lunar base.

The original 1967 image shows no such base:

www.lpi.usra.edu...


edit on 3/12/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   

tachyonator7
i asked you for a comment on the wikipedia moon photograph, not for another 'more zoomed in' photo. if you don't know you can use CTRL & + to zoom in on it.


I did. I said a small image of the entire moon cannot give you the detail you are looking for. You would need to zoom in real close to Eudoxus in that image, and by zooming in you lose detail and resolution.

To answer your question directly, I'm sure that wiki image is a real and true image. However, the crater in question is tiny on that image, and there is no way to see the detail that you want to see.

Why not use better telescopic images of Eudoxus taken with greater magnification? Wouldn't those show better detail?




edit on 3/12/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join