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.

 

Strange Area In Photograph

page: 12
16
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 06:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: lunarrover
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

No, I can prove they are fake.


All this time you could have proven those images I downloaded and presented you with were fake and you haven't bothered to do so.

Now's your chance. Put some effort to supporting your claims.




posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 06:51 AM
link   
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

I already have in post number 1 Kiess crater.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: lunarrover
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

I already have in post number 1 Kiess crater.


No.

In post number one you didn't even know where on the moon precisely it was, and it wasn't until someone else identified the craters on that image (and the actual image number) that you started talking about Kiess crater, and even then you misidentified it as Kies crater and claimed that because it didn't look like Kiess, the Kiess image must be faked.

It wasn't until you started getting posts giving you high resolution images that you began claiming those high resolution ones had been tampered with, and your only explanation for that was that a "layover" of "Disney frosting" was applied.

That is not proving anything. That is simply making a claim without any kind of substantiation for it. It also doesn't explain how that "Disney frosting" somehow produces a much more detailed image than the one you started out with and why those details are corroborated by images from several different nations.

As far as Kiess crater is concerned, I have shown you a photograph from a book published in 1971 of the crater as well as images taken by Japan and China showing it in much more detail than the overprocessed and unsourced version you posted. You have not managed to explain why those images, made from raw files I downloaded from sources you were given, are fake. You have merely insisted that they are and claimed a ludicrous mechanism for it.

Try again.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 07:38 AM
link   
Another view of Kiess crater, this time in Apollo 8 16mm footage from this video:





Even this is of better quality than the original view of Kiess given to us. No pipeline.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Too much fog to tel i can clean it in vegas pro but not yet



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

You know my thoughts by now? and I'm not convinced anything you have offered proves me wrong it just bolsters the fact that you are not adding anything to make me see otherwise. Until I see something that I believe is better then I have to stay with my current thoughts on this that the original image I posted in my opening post is the best representation of that area.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 10:25 AM
link   
A view of the alleged pipeline as taken from Apollo 12:

tothemoon.ser.asu.edu...-51-7565

Here's a close up of it from the raw unedited 189Mb TIFF image:



Nothing added, nothing taken away.

Same image, level adjusted to improve detail:



Exactly the same view as replicated using JAXA data:



Where's the pipeline? Are the details in it exactly the same as the Apollo image or not? The source I linked to is a completely unedited raw scan. You can see exactly the same details in that.

Again with the claims of fog. Here's the alleged area of the pipeline from that Apollo 8 16mm footage, cropped and rotated to the correct orientation:



I've adjusted the brightness in it to make details easier to see.

Where's the pipeline?
edit on 31/1/2019 by OneBigMonkeyToo because: corrected link



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 11:00 AM
link   
The same "pipeline" area, this time in lunar orbiter image 4027-H3

www.lpi.usra.edu...



and to avoid any accusations of fakery from the LPI (the source used by the OP for other images, with which he is presumably happy), here is the same image photographed with my phone from my copy of the 1971 photographic atlas:



The only differences are down to the print quality of the book, not digital enhancements of the LPI copy.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 11:18 AM
link   
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Pahahahahaha.

Funny, especially the bit you have changed the brightness on.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 12:05 PM
link   
So to recap:

We have multiple sources showing a small area of Kiess crater with a couple of small craters and a few hills. those sources include an actual real life book of Lunar Orbiter images from the 1960s, 16mm video, Apollo mission images, and images taken by China and Japan. Japanese data have also been used to create a 3D model that can be used to explore the area in question from any angle you like. I haven't even bothered trying to look at the half a dozen or so raw LRO NAC images that cover that particular spot in the crater because (frankly) I've wasted enough of my time trying to educate someone who really doesn't want to be. There will, however, be a 3D model using Chinese data once I've finished downloading the 2.2 Gb DEM seeing as that's been started.

All of these are arbitrarily dismissed in favour of one very low resolution (and for some bizarre reason flipped and unsourced) Apollo image for which far better high resolution copies exist, both at the ASU and the LPI, and a promised proof that all the other images are faked in some way that has yet to materialise.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Its all just rubbish in rubbish out tho isnt it.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: lunarrover
a reply to: OneBigMonkeyToo

Its all just rubbish in rubbish out tho isnt it.


I'm confused by this statement. Since the image you posted in from NASA's Apollo 16 (image number AS16-M-0648), and you seem to be negating images from NASA and others as being "rubbish", what makes the NASA image you posted not rubbish (in your mind)?


edit on 1/31/2019 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

All differ in quality.
edit on 31-1-2019 by lunarrover because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Not saying all Nasa images are bad just the disinfo ones matey keeps pushing on us.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 12:36 PM
link   
a reply to: lunarrover

You're gonna need to be more specific.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 12:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: lunarrover
Not saying all Nasa images are bad just the disinfo ones matey keeps pushing on us.



I'm pretty sure you can heavily process and manipulate those others "disinfo" images into something that suits your needs, like you manipulated the one in the OP.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

I will you betcha.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Mate, I am good not a magician.



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

This image looks like it was taken face down in a fish pool at night? You couldn't take a worse image if you tried. It is beyond garbage. Sorry it is absolutely unadulterated garbage.
files.abovetopsecret.com...
edit on 31-1-2019 by lunarrover because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2019 @ 02:48 PM
link   
a reply to: lunarrover

What are you, Goldilocks? Some images are too high resolution, some poor, but only the one you found is just right?

I gave you the source. Do better. It still manages to show more detail than the image you are using as proof of you imaginary pipeline, and it matches what can be seen in the higher resolution images. Shall we remind ourselves of the superior quality of your version?



And you're complaining about the quality of a cropped screenshot from youtube?

While you've been sitting around not providing anything to support your claim I've been downloading 1.2gb tiff images of Apollo Metric Mapping camera. Here's your imaginary pipeline as seen in AS17-M-2834.



Just for fun, here's that image superimposed on Japan's DEM data:



Where's the pipeline? Where's your proof that all the other images (apart from the one that you believe conveniently supports your ridiculous idea) are faked? Any time you're ready.



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join