posted on Aug, 22 2014 @ 01:12 AM
a reply to: jamie6737
No I DO see it, there is a repeating pattern that though eroded or partially buried look's a little too regular and it is suspicious but too
ambiguous to be called definitive and can be explained away even if wrongly by the scheptic's the first object though was right on the mark as far as
I am concerned.
Here is a similar thread, www.abovetopsecret.com...
Older image's are more reliable because in those day's all the obfuscation techniques used by the intelligence operative's who did not want the
public or there enemy's to know that there may be potential artifact's and potential technology on the lunar surface ahead of what they then had
where done by hand and eye, the people who Air brushed the information out or cut and pasted were expert's at photo manipulation but they were not
computer's with advanced algorythm's designed to spot concealed structure's (the same algoryth's that can spot archaeologicaly ancient structures
on earth but are not released to the public are used to spot and intelligently blend way any such artifact's that are found today with the raw data
never being released unless it is leaked), so they made mistake's and sometime's missed some very interesting thing's up there.
This mean's that older photo's unless they are re released are unlikely to have been computer post processed and more likely to have
Newer photos' such as Hi Rise are more likely to have been post processed and thus are less likely to have any mistake's and all artifact's are
removed, blended or obfuscated at above pixel level's of processing making the image look untampered and original, yet the debunker's will keep on
coming back with these later image's claiming they disproved what is on the original earlier image's and there are some great image's from the
apollo missions with some great artifact's that you would simply not see today.
Get this the agency that does this work's for a supposedly democratic society, an educated populace is essential to maintain democracy and they are
paid for by the tax's of there citizens' yet run themselves at total odd's to the principle of democracy and in fact at enmity with it by denying
there own public that essential information to make educated decisions.