New Moon Anomalies Documentary 2018 Most Astonishing Lunar Discoveries Ever Made

originally posted by: CaptainBeno
Gosh, you lot are a hard sell?

I thought the vid was at least interesting enough to post. Everything has to be so 100% factual nowadays. "WE WANT UNDENIABLE PROOF" Beno! Sure, I get that, and I get that the video was not exactly spot on, however, it wasn't a spooky music, paint shop pro extravaganza, so you can be thankful for that I guess.

The title by the way....not mine.. just following rules guys.

Maybe you are trying to sell it to the wrong crowd? Afaik ATS is about denying ignorance, not exploiting it.

a reply to: wildespace

Care to show any of these high-res pics?

Cause noone here or anywhere else have seen any such thing.

originally posted by: CaptainBeno
Gosh, you lot are a hard sell?

I thought the vid was at least interesting enough to post. Everything has to be so 100% factual nowadays. "WE WANT UNDENIABLE PROOF" Beno! Sure, I get that, and I get that the video was not exactly spot on, however, it wasn't a spooky music, paint shop pro extravaganza, so you can be thankful for that I guess.

The title by the way....not mine.. just following rules guys.

The mods can verify this but the title rule applies to news stories, and this is not a news story, so don't use that excuse, it's not a rule that you have to use the same title in your post as in the hoaxed video you post. In fact it would have followed the rules better if you had titled your thread thusly:

Check out the hoaxed moon anomaly in this video!

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: LABTECH767

Your second link is wrong, it doesn't point to any image.

Thank's for that Armap, you are right, probably a typo on my part.
Here is the image it was meant to point to, note the red is simply my cack handed method of outlining what 'I' see and of course that is subjective as other's may see nothing or just a bunch of rock's.

It is the right most of the three circled areas of interest in this scene also highlighted in red.


But of course we know these are not the only such sites, the Catalogue also has at least two more images of the site taken from the moving rover, one to the right of the scene and one to the left I believe they are catalogue no' 799 and 801 respectively.

Of course it is a subjective point but if you find it interesting and can obtain a high resolution image despite the brightness of the scene washing out a lot of detail the detail's on the belt are obvious.
To my analysis the suit look's to have been a composite hard soft design similar to several prototypes that were eventually not used by both Nasa and the Russian's but not used when they actually went up for a number of reason's, in this case the chest piece seem's to have had at least a front hard piece which extended down to below the belt probably with soft rather than hard limb's, the helmet bezel also appears to still have remnants of the visor in place around it but seem's to be broken in the middle, I really could not make out a face but did seem to see perhaps a hint of eye socket's were the skull should be either degraded into or buried in a layer dust/debris, the leg's are simply not there in any practical way but there are strange pieces were they would have been which may indicate remain's of harder section's such as the knee joint's but perhaps I just could not see them clearly as in this image were I left them out completely and only highlighted the part's I was certain of.

originally posted by: ParasuvO
Care to show any of these high-res pics?

Cause noone here or anywhere else have seen any such thing.

Did you click on the link in wildespace's post?

Here's a link to a different page, showing the last available photo (if I'm not mistaken). In this case the resolution is only 2 metres per pixel, as the resolution changes with the altitude at which the satellite is at the moment (the cameras do not have zoom).

Here you can choose among the 1,641,686 high resolution photos available, although not all of those have usable data.

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: wildespace

Care to show any of these high-res pics?

Cause noone here or anywhere else have seen any such thing.

I gave a link where you can zoom in all way to those images, and use a query tool to search for lots more.

Here's one of my favourite, showing the central peak of Tycho crater and an enormous boulder that resides there: wms.lroc.asu.edu...



Here's another cool one, showing the central peak in Aristarchus crater (also with some impressive boulders): wms.lroc.asu.edu...



Permalink to the QuickMap.

originally posted by: wildespace
The deal with the Moon "anomalies" should be very simple: we have very high resolution imagery of the whole Moon from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, with the typical resolution of 0.5 meters per pixel, and 0.25 m/p in some places.

I don't think we have high resolution photos from the whole Moon, even the NAC layer on the quickmap shows many places without any photos.

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: wildespace

Care to show any of these high-res pics?

Cause noone here or anywhere else have seen any such thing.

I've seen them, and wildespace provided a link to them.

The LROC website and zoomable "QuickMap" has been around for several years online (QuickMap since 2011, I think), and I and others have provide links to it and its specific images over the years.

The resolution is excellent; in most cases, you'd be able to see an object the size of a beach ball or basketball.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: wildespace
The deal with the Moon "anomalies" should be very simple: we have very high resolution imagery of the whole Moon from the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, with the typical resolution of 0.5 meters per pixel, and 0.25 m/p in some places.

I don't think we have high resolution photos from the whole Moon, even the NAC layer on the quickmap shows many places without any photos.

I have yet to find a place on the Moon without NAC coverage, but you probably explored it more than me. In the QuickMap, using a "polygon" query tool allows you to access all the NAC images for any particular location (even if it looks like there aren't any).

For example, here's a query list for one of such seemingly NAC-less area:

a reply to: wildespace

I trusted the NAC layer, I didn't know that it doesn't show all the photos available.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: wildespace

I trusted the NAC layer, I didn't know that it doesn't show all the photos available.

The NAC layer is just a cosmetic way to show imagery when you zoom enough. Each particular spot on the Moon (with perhaps some exceptions) has dozens of NAC image strips covering it.

a reply to: CaptainBeno

Looks like the space nation of Asgardia are screwed then!

they want a moon base

a reply to: CaptainBeno

interesting, well presented, not convinced, but open to the idea

a reply to: CaptainBeno

I stopped at the utterance of "Richard Hoagland." The man who insists that lumps of ice in Saturn's rings are apartments.

This saddens me. ATS is in bad shape. Embarrassed, I am and remain.

The more i read stuff like this the more i love John Lear. 👍

originally posted by: CaptainBeno

Lunar bases have been reported by astronauts

I didn't get the memo. Where can I see these astronaut reports?

originally posted by: MaxTamesSiva
Why single out Hoagland when Swann, Leonard and Chatelain, among others was mentioned in the vid?

Why should anyone believe any fable from Hogwashland, Leonard, and Chatelain? What 'inside' sources would ANY of them have had access to?

Gordon Cooper said on video that he had looked at all the Apollo photos and saw no sign of ET activity on the moon.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJMrU8WCeWY&t=1943s

Hmm.. they appear to contradict themselves within the first minute.

"..most of the general public believes ..UFOs exist..., ..however most people don't give it much attention or thought..."


..and if one is concerned with ridicule then why start a video using fantastical made up images of UFOs. Thats the last thing you should do. It will immediately put off all those viewers who's opinion you are trying to sway.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: CaptainBeno

Lunar bases have been reported by astronauts

I didn't get the memo. Where can I see these astronaut reports?

I checked the video and the comments. Of course there are no verifiable reports. It's all BS, and Captain Beno [the OP] ought to be ashamed for being an accessory after the fact to fraud. Shame on you. Grow up.