Nasa moon footage of something active on moon...

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 5 2003 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Could it be a metorite hitting?? Or something volcanic (is the moon volcanically active? I don't think so..)
Heaps of pics on site...

shadowboxent.brinkster.net...

The August, 2003 issue of Electric Space Craft, a scientific journal, contains an amazing series of images taken from NASA footage included in the TV program, NOVA: To the Moon. The significance of the images has only recently been noticed.

As Apollo 8 orbited 70 miles above the lunar surface, with Earth in the background, it filmed the ground below. At one point, a small, black object, tall and cylindrical, appears jutting from the moon. Just as the camera is about to pass by, the strange object clearly releases a jet-like cloud.

It looks like a smokestack ejecting a puff of smoke. The cloud drifts to the right and then dissipates. Though the black object appears small on the screen, it must be thousands of feet tall if the footage was taken from such a high altitude.




posted on Sep, 5 2003 @ 11:30 PM
link   
I actually saw this earlier today but my comp crashed because of some dumb trojn and it took me 10 mnutes to get rid of it and I forgot the site.
I think It's a missle test to see the effects of an explosion with no atmosphere...
It was conventional though.

- Tassadar

Of couse, it wouldn't be that hard to make a fake movie of that...


[Edited on 6-9-2003 by Tassadar]



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 05:41 AM
link   
It's called white balance. As the camera zoomed in more light captured in the camera. Black thing? Probably a speck of dirt on the camera, maybe even something more simple.



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Doesn't look all that impressive to me. I've seen far better moon video. Like that Apollo 16 moon disk.



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 06:00 AM
link   
It could just be something blowing around on the surface and kicking up sand.


any

posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 06:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by iconoclast
It could just be something blowing around on the surface and kicking up sand.


Erm... what?



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 06:14 AM
link   
is it possible for something to be blowing around on the surface? or maybe rocks rolling down a hill or do you think it is a mouse chasing some moon cheese?



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by iconoclast
is it possible for something to be blowing around on the surface? or maybe rocks rolling down a hill or do you think it is a mouse chasing some moon cheese?


There's no atmoshphere on the moon so nothing could "blow" around.



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Indeed there is better footage like the moondisk. This looks like literally 'Dirt' to me!



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 07:52 AM
link   


....as I said, I was standing on the moon smoking a cigarette when suddenly this strange metallic thing came flying by....



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 04:42 PM
link   
LOL Mik.... nice.

Again I will say as I've said before...

WHY OH WHY does every picture and video ever taken of UFO related stuff have to be as crappy as possible? They're always unfocused, distant, wobbly, low-res, pieces of crap... why can't someone who KNOWS what they're doing with a friggin camera see an alien? GEEZE!



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Greyhaven
LOL Mik.... nice.

Again I will say as I've said before...

WHY OH WHY does every picture and video ever taken of UFO related stuff have to be as crappy as possible? They're always unfocused, distant, wobbly, low-res, pieces of crap... why can't someone who KNOWS what they're doing with a friggin camera see an alien? GEEZE!


Exactly, and why are they always naked or wearing "bio-dynamic suits", i.e. naked? I know why. It's because they would have to create a state of the art inter stellar wardrobe as well as those dummies and masks. Another interresting thing with phographic sightings is that the shapes and designs used by the "aliens" seems to be limited by the limitations in human society. UFO design has changed during the last fifty years and basicly reflects the level of engeneering and design man has been working on at given times. There is something to all this, but the hype is wipe. Most of this stuff is prospecting on falsepremises in order to make easy money, some of it is deliberate disinformation to cover up nuclear research etc., a good part of it is new age religion and so on. Something is out there that has been here before and created life and everything on Earth, and it's coming back. About that I am sure.

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Sep, 6 2003 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Its tuff to say if this is fake or not The exact time frame per picture as to when it was taken would first have to be known. Secondly The position of the sun during these photos would also have to be known in order to be able to tell if the sun was behind the object because from what it looks like there appears to be a shadow that is extended for some distance of the object. There also appears to be a time gap of some sort. On the animated picture there seems to be at least a few hours difference in some of the shots taken because if you look at what appears to be the shadow it has moved slightly at one point. This would mean that if the sun was behind the object it would have made what appears to be that shadow but it would also have to have been taken over a period of hours because of light physics and understanding how shadows move with light exposer over a period of time. If there were any other photos that were clearer it would be a little bit easier to tell if this was fake because if there were any intersecting shadows it would have to have come from more than one light sorce. Intersting photo though hope more turns up it.

Falcon



posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by falcon
Its tuff to say if this is fake or not The exact time frame per picture as to when it was taken would first have to be known. Secondly The position of the sun during these photos would also have to be known in order to be able to tell if the sun was behind the object because from what it looks like there appears to be a shadow that is extended for some distance of the object. There also appears to be a time gap of some sort. On the animated picture there seems to be at least a few hours difference in some of the shots taken because if you look at what appears to be the shadow it has moved slightly at one point. This would mean that if the sun was behind the object it would have made what appears to be that shadow but it would also have to have been taken over a period of hours because of light physics and understanding how shadows move with light exposer over a period of time. If there were any other photos that were clearer it would be a little bit easier to tell if this was fake because if there were any intersecting shadows it would have to have come from more than one light sorce. Intersting photo though hope more turns up it.

Falcon


My guess is that this together with the fotage of the moonlanding has been recorded somewhere in the Nevada desert. If not, why did the flag they planted wave as if there was wind? And how could they photograph the landing vessel from the moon surface? When they hadn't yet landed! And when you look at the pictures presented here, which may actually be a picture of someone taking a cig on "the moon"(!)..... They don't fool me.....

Blessings,
Mikromarius



posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Not really sure with this one, looks interesting but seems tricky to reach any definitive answer as to what it might be.



posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by cassini
Not really sure with this one, looks interesting but seems tricky to reach any definitive answer as to what it might be.


It's not that the moon farts out gas or smoke I find strange, but rather the wind that catches the smoke/gas and dissolves it. Perhaps it is the same wint that made the American flag wave. The small step for mr. Armstrong was probably just a regular step, but by playing back the tape in slo mo and add some special effects and abra cadabra NASA had landed on the moon. I don't believe them until they project commercials on the moon or I'm standing there myself. There is absolutely noone in this world that will manage to make me believe that the Americans landed on the Moon back in the sixties. I would like to know how they manage to send a live stream of video and audio via radiowaves through the empty space among other things, and I must underline that this is supposed to have happened a decade before the first Cray computer surfaced. Sending up a rocket up in the sky is one thing, but landing a man on the moon is something else, when all the computing power they had back then could easily fit into a laptop now. We're speeking pretty advanced math and physics here, and luck! It may of course be the truth, but I somehow don't believe in those tapes. Whatever they did back then it was something else than landing something on the Moon. Like making the really strange flying machines they seem to have a few of. Or simply to fund something increddibly expensive. I don't doubt that it is possible to land on the Moon, and for that matter I do believe the Americans have landed on it, but just not at that critical phase of the cold war back in the sixties.... My guess is that it was a show created using Hollywood magic and the most guillable audience of them all the children of science, the worshippers of television, nuclear energy and cowboys. Probably nothing else than a highly risky near space operation involving dropping people down in tincans from extremely high altitudes if you ask me.

Blessings,
Mikromarius


jra

posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 05:32 PM
link   
mikromarius: the flag waved cause the poll was being twisted into the ground by the guy. i've watched it many times.

i don't think i've ever seen any footage of the LM landing on the surface. i'd be really interested to see that (assuming you have your facts correct). perhaps you ment the footage of it leaving the surface?

as for the original footage in question.. it would be nice to find a better quality video and or pictures. watching a small animated .gif that plays at 2fps does not really do it for me. i've been trying to find some higher quality pics of that, but not having much luck at the moment.



posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 05:37 PM
link   
[Edited on 9/9/2003 by SamaraMorgueAnn]



posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 05:42 PM
link   
[Edited on 9/9/2003 by SamaraMorgueAnn]



posted on Sep, 7 2003 @ 05:52 PM
link   
[Edited on 9/9/2003 by SamaraMorgueAnn]





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join