glass structure on moon??? (with pic)

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 03:51 PM
link   
www.enterprisemission.com...

what the hell-o is this???

it says it is NOT merely a reflextion of a glass structure on the moon!?!?!?




[edit on 28-11-2004 by they see ALL]




posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 03:54 PM
link   
It says its not merely a reflection but I think its merely a reflection.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Probally:
The Sun
Reflection of the space station
Camera Reflection
I doubt it was a glass structure...



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard
It says its not merely a reflection but I think its merely a reflection.


thanks...

so, is it reflecting glass???

i don't get it...





posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Im assuming the astronaut taking the photo was inside the spacecraft so the light is probably a reflection off the window he is looking through.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 04:04 PM
link   
Something man left behind? You know what, the moon landing hoax theory has always fascinated, not that I ness beleive it, most of the arguments have been debunked BUT.....some questions remain, such as:
1. why the "blowing" flag _no wind up there.
2. why no other nation particularly Russia ever followed USA to moon in the 35 years since? After such an intence "race" you'd think they would atleast want to show "we can do it too"?
3. why detailed suface photography of the moon since, showing the stuff left behind etc?
4. why no revisit since by USA? Why build a spacestation in orbit, why not on the moons surface? Why no moon mining etc by now?



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Damn, you found me.

I'm with kinglizard on this one. If they say it is not a reflection, I want to see some proof. If they took these pictures could they not take more? From different perspectives, maybe?


jra

posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by instar
Something man left behind? You know what, the moon landing hoax theory has always fascinated, not that I ness beleive it, most of the arguments have been debunked BUT.....some questions remain, such as:
1. why the "blowing" flag _no wind up there.
2. why no other nation particularly Russia ever followed USA to moon in the 35 years since? After such an intence "race" you'd think they would atleast want to show "we can do it too"?
3. why detailed suface photography of the moon since, showing the stuff left behind etc?
4. why no revisit since by USA? Why build a spacestation in orbit, why not on the moons surface? Why no moon mining etc by now?


1. It's been answered the other hundreds of threads on the moon landing hoax. The astronaut was twisting the pole into the ground, thus making the flag "wave".

2. Too much money. It's as simple as that. The U.S.S.R. had some big plans on setting up a base on the moon in the late 80's, but then the U.S.S.R. collapsed and that was the end of that.

3. I'm guessing you ment to say "Why no detailed surface photos of the moon since?" Well there just haven't been many probes sent to the moon. Although an ESA probe just got there a week ago or so. It should be taking some highres shots of the moon. Not sure if one will be able to make out the landing sites though.

4. Again, simply money or lack there of. Doing any of that stuff would cost way too much. The ISS very expencive. Imagine trying to supply one that's on the moon or even just orbiting. Also now that i think of it, we also can't go back to the moon right now, because NASA has nothing that can get there now. The space shuttle can't beyond a low Earth orbit.



posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Its nothing we left behind. If it was we wouldnt be able to see it anyway even with reflections. That thing is reflecting more light than an average star in the night sky so it would be eaisly visible to the naked eye. Let me find out the crater name of the big guy right infront of it then do a cross chek on appllo landing sites. That ought to tell us if this is real or fake.


( busts out moon atlas...... hmm a moon phase would help)

look here is an immage of the moon i took myself a few weeks back. there isnt anything out the ordinary.





posted on Nov, 28 2004 @ 08:18 PM
link   
actually my immage above is upside down sorry.

The picture on the left is in the south-west quadrant of the moon. The big prominent crater is called "Blancanus" The closest applo landings were 12 and 14 and they are right off "Mare Cognitum" . The second picture the one on the right is a zoom of the pic on the left.


Here I did this in paint to show how far away the nearst applo landigns were.









Edit: after review i feel like a dum-as becasue it says take by applo 13 crew so it very well could be a reflection of something but still nothing was left in that area. i thought the photo was taken by someone with a scoep becasue thats about the same immages you can get with high magnification. any way my evidince is still clear because we left nothing in that area.

[edit on 28-11-2004 by Mizar]

[edit on 29-11-2004 by Thomas Crowne]



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by instar
Something man left behind? You know what, the moon landing hoax theory has always fascinated, not that I ness beleive it, most of the arguments have been debunked BUT.....some questions remain, such as:
1. why the "blowing" flag _no wind up there.
2. why no other nation particularly Russia ever followed USA to moon in the 35 years since? After such an intence "race" you'd think they would atleast want to show "we can do it too"?
3. why detailed suface photography of the moon since, showing the stuff left behind etc?
4. why no revisit since by USA? Why build a spacestation in orbit, why not on the moons surface? Why no moon mining etc by now?


1. ahhhh...Thats the MOST de-bunked one.


2.There was no more point, remember, that these two nations didn't want to be the first to the moon because they wanted to be the first to get a science out of it.

3. Detailed is a relative term, they did "map" the moon, but in todays high res digital world a 1970's picture isn't very impressive.

4. VERY VERY EXPENSIVE, So then the US with internation partners decided it would be cheaper to do future science experiments in earths orbit because its takes less time to get there and is cheaper (then the moon). But as we relize today with double digits in the billions being sucked into the ISS. The Shuttle will go back to its job of finish building the ISS in under 6 months, and thats what it will do for several more years. and during that time Nasa will also be sending probes to the moon and at the same time keep sending them to Mars. America will return to the moon before 2020. Its obvious now that the moon is a WAY better place for...well...everything, not only mining but there is several uses we will be able to tap into, for one, we wont always have to worry about the future moon base having enough fuel to keep it at its orbit, and no more space walks, if a part malfunctions on the moon they can put a suit on and hop out and fix it, or keep several things in a storage building, something thats impossible to do on the ISS do to its lack of room.

In other words I'm glad that Bush shifted Nasa in a different direction, the space station is impressive but when you compare the goods and the bads with the moon or LEO, its...well...no comparision at all.


E_T

posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 04:44 AM
link   
This page shows what that site is about.


Try taking photographs through window having spots so that sun is shining from that general direction. (or that light level outside is bright)
As well it could be just some light inside module reflecting from windows.



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 04:50 AM
link   
Thanks to all who brought up good point on the moon hoax questions. However, that is the topic of several threads already here on ATS. So please stay on topic on this one.

Thanks
FredT



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 05:06 AM
link   
It looks like a emergency venting of a terraforming station. It's gonna blow!



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 06:02 AM
link   
All I can see a light reflected in the _.....



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 08:41 AM
link   
im not sure about those pictures, but check out these photoshop smudges in these images taken from the clementine satellite. The guy who made the website has all kinds of pictures like these, from both moon and mars. Insight? www.marsanomalyresearch.com...



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by jra
(snip)
2. Too much money. It's as simple as that.

(About why manned space exploration is hung up)

(snip)


Not so simple. The government prints money and makes credit
through fractional banking "out of thin air". The $200 billion and
counting for the Iraq war is an example of how "easy" it is to
find money for what the government wants to do, even when
it is bankrupt by any rational analysis.

There are definite reasons why no country has returned to the
moon, why the space station is never finished, why less
costly means to travel into space has never been developed.
There are no power satellites, no manned Mars mission yet,
no manned missions at all beyond low earth orbit.

The pseudo reality (Matrix analog that applies to a
brainwashed world of people) reasons all make good sound
bites for explaining why those things have not happened.

The real reasons are probably closer to some of the conspiracy
theories than most people would guess.

[edit on 29-11-2004 by mockan]


E_T

posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by afklop
www.marsanomalyresearch.com...
That picture is composed from several high resolution images.

FOV with high-res images is so small that capturing whole surface would take very long time and much work so there's often some thin gaps between them if area didn't interest scientists.
(and those areas are took from smaller resolution/wider FOV images)



posted on Nov, 29 2004 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by E_T

Originally posted by afklop
www.marsanomalyresearch.com...
That picture is composed from several high resolution images.

FOV with high-res images is so small that capturing whole surface would take very long time and much work so there's often some thin gaps between them if area didn't interest scientists.
(and those areas are took from smaller resolution/wider FOV images)


Yes if you look at it zoomed out a little, you can see where the images were spliced together, just looks like a verticle line... but that does not explain those pictures or all of the other ones on the site.



posted on Aug, 11 2008 @ 02:09 AM
link   





top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join


Haters, Bigots, Partisan Trolls, Propaganda Hacks, Racists, and LOL-tards: Time To Move On.
read more: Community Announcement re: Decorum