Where is are the unphotoshopped moon pictures?

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

You can do exactly the same thing with talcum powder, which is just ground up silicacious lava and also has very jagged edges.

And may be a causational agent in uterine cancer incidence.

originally posted by: MisterSpock
I have 494 GB's of unedited images of the moon in RAW format.

I got them from my father, whom he and his brother worked at nasa from 1956 until around 1999. They are all on tape drives, I"m currently in the process of transferring them over to DVD rom and intend to make duplicate copies in order to preserve them.

I've gotten through about 20%, some of it is truly mind blowing.

ETA: I'm doing all of this on an offline computer, in order to minimize any outside interference.

Now that you have alerted TPTB, for the sake of the safety of your project I suggest that you use as old a computer that will do the job. Do not put it anywhere near any other computer that is modern or linked to the net.

Suggest that you read jimstone on his expereince/knolwedge of these chips. He will tell you that a paticular brand of modern chip is very hackable.

a reply to: Azureblue

I would recommend a Sinclair ZX81. Unhackable.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
Original untouched,
files.abovetopsecret.com...
Heighlighted by me, very poorly I might add to show the part's of what I believe to be an upturned tracked vehicle, it's tread's still on the ground along with at least one of it's wheel's, the cab split into two part's that DO fit back together and some kind of cargo that resembles (only resembles) wrapped body's between them.
files.abovetopsecret.com...
The larger stone at it's left and the smaller one to it's right seem to fit together as well, think some kind of tower or something else knocked over, assume that the broken off part goes were that long dotted line shows it fit's and stand that end at the base of the object.

Yes it's all rocks - here are those rocks picked out in an LRO image:



Here's the source of my LRO image

lroc.sese.asu.edu...

The large rock you've drawn an arrow to is 'House rock', and they broadcast live TV from it and also took many photos of it from close up that show that it is (wait for it) a rock.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Azureblue

I would recommend a Sinclair ZX81. Unhackable.

I dont know much at all about chips so I cant comment on that but Jimstone says they have found a way of jumping hardware gaps and record using microphones built into the hardware, something to that effect.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Maplestory777

There are none.
Every image of the Moon, everywhere on the internet, has been photoshopped.

You can tell because none of them have alien cities on them.

lol , but give the guy a lttle break, i was beginning to think ATS stood for All Trump Stories.

Firstly - You cannot "UN-Photoshop" an image without the original Photoshop document. As far as I am aware, Photoshop was not around when man was on the moon and those pics came back.

Secondly - IMO - Man went to the moon And yes, they saw things they probably are not allowed to talk about.

The proof for me was the pictures of the Lunar Landing Sites. Yes, the probes were launched by NASA but all the images interpretation etc. are done by academic groups. Most notably the LROC Science Operations Center at Arizona State University and the German Aerospace Center in Berlin.

Just my penny.

a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

I like that shot but it does not take away any opinion I have that these are artifact's of potentially non natural origin, the larger rock AKA house rock is less suggestive in the image but beside the front section of the split vehicle there is even visible a straight line even in that low resolution which is thankful to the sun being at the right angle to caste a long enough low shadow, there appears to be a second wheel though that behind the object further along the dismounted caterpillar track which form's the straight line, the front section of the vehicle is very interesting and just the shape I assumed it would be as is the rear section though looking at that I was brought more in mind of something like like this but obviously more rugged, a more narrow track base and of course the front section blown over into it's roof at an angle next to the track's were they are still embedded and buried in the lunar dirt (By front section I mean the one closest in the classic ground shot not the one furthest back but I may be looking at the donkey's ass so to speak and calling it it's head but you get my opinion of the contraption).
I had a better example than the following but the link was too long for the site to display.
olive-drab.com...
IF I am right in my thought's then digging below the insulating lunar surface would be ideal for recovering less decayed relic's from such an object.

originally posted by: Mianeye
I'm sure John Lear has some, if you can find his website

What you should have said John Lear has some OVER ACTIVE imagination

a reply to: MisterSpock

Would you mind showing me some this sounds fascinating

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Maplestory777

I do believe they were real but there are all those images with the rock's going in front of the lens etching's which scientific american once published that did look extremely fishy, if I had not moved house so much I Would still have that edition.

That happens due to CONTRAST & EXPOSURE the rest of your claims are simple YOU want to find something so you see something no vehicle no towers no broken parts just rocks.

originally posted by: MisterSpock

originally posted by: Zarniwoop
a reply to: MisterSpock

I've gotten through about 20%, some of it is truly mind blowing.

Please post one picture here from your stash that is truly mind blowing

No need to get through all of them first.

I don't want to post them here, it would compromise the rest of the project.

I'd be happy to send a copy to you.

Just send 49.99 and a self addressed stamped envelope and I'll send you a DVD.

Hey, are you that Nigerian prince that keeps emailing me ? I'm still waiting for the money to be wired.

But seriously, have you put any of them online, and could you provide a link ? Thank you.

*Snip*

Sorry, double post. Please remove.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Here is a point, I made it very clear that I do know what pariadolia is and it is NOT seeing things in cloud's, it is about the Rorschach test, the term was then used to envelope the natural image recognition ability that we human's have, that ability which along with our ability to think abstract allowed us to invent writing, two dimensional art and indeed the modern world, SO it is not a malfunction.

I do not WANT to see something I simply do, you have your opinion and I have mine so let's leave it there as I know that I have my point, this is not about arguing for the sake of it, if there are artifacts on the moon then let's be perfectly frank they do NOT belong to only one nation, let alone some hidden corrupt and criminal elite but they are in fact the Legacy that belong's to all humanity and that is my motivation, there are certain individual's whom want to sit on this information, keep it from the public and brainwash the mass of the population to keep those people in line and themselves in a position of power, it is a very old game they are playing but in this circumstance unless they have a bloody good reason to do so they are acting in a totally criminal and utterly unethical manner.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Pareidolia is most definitely about seeing patterns in the random - it's completely different to the way we use Rorschach images.

I'm not doubting that you genuinely believe those things to be there, what I (and others) suggest is that your interpretation of the data in the images is very much coloured by your belief that there are other things there.

I, on the other hand, am happy with them just being rocks. The nature of the way the human brain works is that once someone suggests that something 'looks like' another shape it's very difficult not to see that shape in those terms. It doesn't mean that they aren't just rocks though.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Well tell you what when you post a NASA/Apollo image state the image number but later I will post the image with your claimed vehicle so we can see the ROCKS