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.

 

John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS

page: 111
164
<< 108  109  110    112  113  114 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

. . .
Now I don't mind doing the research for you armchair seekers
and I know no one really reads all the posts in a 100 plus page thread, but surely you could at least read THE FIRST PAGE?!?!?!

. . .

:shk:


Well, Zorgon, maybe I am the first one. I heard John Lear on Coast to Coast when he was on a few weeks ago. I wasn't able to catch the whole show, but I went on Coast to Coast's website to check out some of the photos. Very interesting I thought, but not enough (it's never enough, right??
) so after some simple searching I ended up here.

I have read every post of this thread, all 110 pages, from start to finish. Oh how I was tempted to skip ahead several times, but my patience was definitely rewarded. From the find of the original cube ( or parking garage, right Mr. Lear?) and mining equipment in Copernicus, the anomalies on the Lick photos, the paper trail tying this whole thing to NASA, USAF, and private government contractors. And the latest round of images, the mysterious 13 mile arch provided by Mr. Lear, "the shard", multiple peek-a-boos, mysto-cubes, and now C3PO's head??

Mr. Lear, Zorgon, Borg, Matt, ArMap and others, thank you for these pages, thank you for your hard work, and a special thanks to you Mr. Lear for having the courage to share those original negatives with us and get our boulder rolling up that hill


I highly recommend that any newcomers take the time to read thru this entire thread. There is a pearl on every page.

Now that I am up to speed you all will have another set of eyeballs and another set of hands to tow the line.

I look forward to what's around the corner (or square crater if you will).

Thanks Again,

-Doc

(post edited to fix quote)
[edit on 8-3-2007 by DrZERO]

[edit on 8-3-2007 by DrZERO]

[edit on 8-3-2007 by DrZERO]




posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 04:26 AM
link   
wow, the last couple posts full of pictures of rocks has been obvious crap. those are rocks, darlings....
you can tell me anything i have found are rocks, thats fine, I don't care, I am an armchair researcher, but seriously, all these "moon vehicle" posts are just plain rocks.
feel free to rip apart my prior posts, i just think the newer ones are crap.

[edit on 8-3-2007 by jetflock]



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetflock
wow, the last couple posts full of pictures of rocks has been obvious crap. those are rocks, darlings....
you can tell me anything i have found are rocks, thats fine, I don't care, I am an armchair researcher, but seriously, all these "moon vehicle" posts are just plain rocks.
feel free to rip apart my prior posts, i just think the newer ones are crap.

[edit on 8-3-2007 by jetflock]

I also see less in these latest images and really have to imagine more than Id like too. But I welcome the others poring over these for further analysis.
Now I know a few of you believe the Clementine images are crap but the ones in color 40xx available through Nasa are not of the cut and paste variety at all and show some very rich details in many areas. I have converted my past and some new pic's from the Nasa Clementine 40xx Screenshots to Jpeg for Yahoo photos but their coordinates are the file names and can belverified quite easily. I also have the original tiff's of the images if need as well for further proof.
A decent photo program(thanks again Zorgon) can show much more detail on most all Nasa images also.
new.photos.yahoo.com...



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh
This part of the image (Which I've taken the liberty to enlarge), is what I'm interested in. Fascinating, to say the least!!
(Thanks to undo for the expose!)





[edit on 8-2-2007 by mikesingh]


This is a photo cropped from a frame grab showing the anomaly in the Tsiolowsky crater that was enhanced by Undo using her "SPLIT HSL" method that supposedly can remove masked layers and uncover the information underneath (the details of this process are on page 92 of this thread).

There was some debate as to the validity of this method, as brought up by ArMap:


Originally posted by ArMaP

. . .

As a test, try to see what was on the original image on the right of my Christmas tree.



You can not, there is no way to recover deleted information.

Please do not waste your time with a technique that is meaningless.

Edit: I forgot the photo of the Christmas tree.


[edit on 8/2/2007 by ArMaP]


ArMap, was anyone ever able to uncover the masked information on the this picture of the Christmas Tree you posted? I saw this picture posted shortly after :


Originally posted by Freezer

Originally posted by ArMaP
As a test, try to see what was on the original image on the right of my Christmas tree.



You can not, there is no way to recover deleted information.

Please do not waste your time with a technique that is meaningless.

Edit: I forgot the photo of the Christmas tree.

[edit on 8/2/2007 by ArMaP]

-------------------------------------





[edit on 8-2-2007 by Freezer]



I thought the UFO poster was added after the fact as a joke, but I wanted to make sure. It seems if this technique does work and Undo was able to "unmask" one frame of a video, then "unmasking" the picture ArMap posted should have been a piece of cake. This seems pretty important as I know there was some speculation as to the nature of this anomaly in Tsiolkowsky, some had speculated that it is an anti-grav craft, not a complex of buildings/structures. Also there have been several images since that were enhanced using this technique.

So I ask again, was anyone able to duplicate Undo’s results with this Christmas tree pic to unmask the information hiding using the “SPLIT HSL” method? and if so can you share your results with the rest of the class?


thanks

(edit for grammar)

[edit on 8-3-2007 by DrZERO]



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by DrZERO

Mr. Lear, Zorgon, Borg, Matt, ArMap and others, thank you for these pages, thank you for your hard work, and a special thanks to you Mr. Lear for having the courage to share those original negatives with us and get our boulder rolling up that hill





Thank you DrZERO for your comments. They are very much appreciated.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Zarniwoop, I would dismiss the holograms if they were not so exact and humanoid at that. The Moonbies have elaborate headdresses the real question is are they dimensional or not my guess is both in our reality and theirs.

Yes, this will be very contraversal but I will take the photo and break it down what I actually see. Once viewers see what I am seeing they will never view the Moon the same way again. The seriousness on the Moonbies humanoid faces is uncanny. There are some alien looking beings that I will highlight and animal looking entities.

What is so weird is Moonbies remind me of the Sandmaries, tiny tiny humanoids on the surface of Mars. Some of us humans on Earth will be able to see the holograms and others will not. It took me a while to develop the 3-D vision and thought it to be a fluke when things on Mars popped up like holograms. This included ground zero missions as well as satellite recon missions.

This is how I discovered Lumeria a massive find on this great Earth in the Western part of the United States Of America. This will go down in history as one of the greatest archeological finds ever. I have mentioned Lumeria a couple of times on ATS threads and predicted the find On Jan. 1st, 2006 Coast to Coast New Year predictions on the Art Bell show. No one to this day on ATS even asked the location or responded to ask questions on the monumental find. In other words no one has taken me seriously. Rik Riley



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
Just incase anyone doubts there are strange things on the moon....

Have a look at these beauties


www.igap.dk...



I found myself on the believers side


Too bad its in danish cause it's pretty interesting.
On another point. Throughtout this whole thread I found myself contemplating what those all black spots could be. Being a photographer I would expect even the slightest highlight in a deep crater so they immediately stood out from the pictures.

The only ways I could find regarding this was 3 things, and please bare with me on the handdrawings


1) Dark spots because of immense caving (as seen from the side):




2) Dark spots because of a resevoir containing a form of liquid (again from the side):




or...

3) bad retouching of the negatives. As in they did not have the ability to "clone" the area properly to match the surroundings.

Cavings would for me mean active altering of the landscape either made by humanoids and would support the mining theory, or that water does/do exist on the moon.

The liquid idea would again support the water theory, but could also mean that an entirely different body of liquid exists on the moon and that would be another reason for activity on the moon.


Thx for a great thread so far


/flice

[edit on 8/3/07 by flice] Linkfix 1

[edit on 8/3/07 by flice] Linkfix 2

[edit on 8/3/07 by flice] Linkfix 3 (im just sooo good with those links arent I? =)

[edit on 8/3/07 by flice] text edit

[edit on 8/3/07 by flice]



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Rik, I am interested in these holograms. Are they used for camouflage? If so do you think its updated technology from what we've seen with the advanced camouflage used to hide HARPP and maybe some of our moon artifacts?

I was wondering also if our government has access to this type of technology and what they would use it for on Earth, but maybe that is what you are getting at with the discovery in the Western US? Are the holograms hiding the archeological find, or are they the find.

Can you get the 3-D effect from pictures of that particular area? Can you Google Earth the site and get the 3-D effect?

Thanks!



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrZERO
ArMap, was anyone ever able to uncover the masked information on the this picture of the Christmas Tree you posted?

As far as I know no one did uncover what is really in the original photo.

And you can be sure that its not a UFO poster.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrZERO

Well, Zorgon, maybe I am the first one.

I have read every post of this thread, all 110 pages, from start to finish.




I am impressed sir! That will get you a wats for sure. ATS ought to award points for diligence


Welcome to our little asylum



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by DrZERO
ArMap, was anyone ever able to uncover the masked information on the this picture of the Christmas Tree you posted?

As far as I know no one did uncover what is really in the original photo.

And you can be sure that its not a UFO poster.


That's what I thought


I am going to move on to other anomalies until someone can tell me what was in that Christmas Tree picture. My opinion on Tsiolkowsky is that it is some type of craft.


Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by DrZERO

Well, Zorgon, maybe I am the first one.

I have read every post of this thread, all 110 pages, from start to finish.




I am impressed sir! That will get you a wats for sure. ATS ought to award points for diligence


Welcome to our little asylum


You made it an easy read, Zorgon, thanks for taking the time to put all this info togeather in a coherent, relatively easy to follow flow. The evolution has been fun to watch. I look forward to future finds and more "dots" (or maybe spheres is a better term) to be connected.


(edit to add reply)


[edit on 8-3-2007 by DrZERO]



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrZERO
Rik, I am interested in these holograms. Are they used for camouflage? If so do you think its updated technology from what we've seen with the advanced camouflage used to hide HARPP and maybe some of our moon artifacts?


Just to refresh for those who didn't catch it...

The HARRP Camouflage...
www.superforce.com...

by the same people who own the mineral rights on the moon...

landoflegends.us...

I wonder how they will enforce it?




posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
As far as I know no one did uncover what is really in the original photo.
And you can be sure that its not a UFO poster.


Not really a controled experiment as we don't know the source of that tree


And from what I am reading on scientific government papers any serious masking is done using algorithms... and just having some of those algorithms
on your computer could get you in serious doggy doo with the feds...

but hey why worry?




posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 06:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
And from what I am reading on scientific government papers any serious masking is done using algorithms... and just having some of those algorithms on your computer could get you in serious doggy doo with the feds...

I am a programmer, maybe I developed my own masking algorithms...

And I am not afraid of the feds, even those who don't use no stinking badges.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Thanks for adding those links on the HARPP camouflage, Zorgon. Those top-secret algorithms they use for masking sound pretty interesting, but I guess I shouldn’t think about it too much, I don’t want any Remote Viewers zeroing in on my coordinates.


Zorgon, what is your opinion in regards to the Tsiolkowsky anomaly?? Do you think it is a craft of some sort or buildings/complex?



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 07:33 PM
link   
Thank you DrZero for your comments. And congrats for making it through all those pages!

I am still sitting on the fence regarding the nature of these anomalies. The primary reason is due to the dust. That stuff is so nasty I believe it would have ground major operations to a halt, providing state of the art technology was used through several decades starting with the 50s. Of course they could have whipped it with electrostatic repulsion early on, but I just don't have any way of knowing yet.

Another popular diversion is alien tech. Since I came here I have learned a great deal about our attempts to understand the nature of the alien equation, and my mind has opened up to new possibilities. But to date I have found no concrete evidence of life from other systems. Synthetic, maybe, and life not as we know it right here, but the proof is still just as elusive as it has always been. It is like adding another unknown to the unknown.

What is most amazing of all to me though is the age of the Moon. It just doesn't seem possible with what we know about planet formation, and this points to yet another unknown, the Moon's origin. I am inclined to accept the possibility that the human race is much older than we currently think, and somewhere in the remote past we either had or were part of a high civilization capable of articulating the structure of solar systems. Accepting the human condition as a universal value contributes to this humancentric view, yet this theory is more plausible to me than alien intervention or present day development.

So the upshot is we really don't know for sure, but I suppose that is the nature of frontiers. It could be a mixture, as most situations turn out to be, but I don't think we will ever know until we return for a closer look.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by VType
wow, the last couple posts full of pictures of rocks has been obvious crap. those are rocks, darlings....



on 8-3-2007 by jetflock]
I also see less in these latest images and really have to imagine more than Id like too.



Here's the thing...

The Case for Rocks:

Many say "They are just rocks..."

1) If they were anything other than rocks why would NASA leave these in a whole set of images when we know that they "sanitize" images?
2) Some of the anomalies on close inspection do indeed look like they are rocks, albeit ones with very unique shapes.

Examples



[imlandoflegends.us...[/im]

The Case for Artifacts:

1) Richard Hoagland of Enterprise Mission has identified them as metallic artifacts. That alone will convince many people...
2) There are many pieces of this puzzle that do not fit the rock hypothesis. There are shapes and textures that are not consistent with rock formations. while it is possible that rocks may form in other crystallization patterns on the Moon, that seems highly unlikely. While Basalt can form huge hexagonal columns, it would not do so on a stone by stone basis.. certainly you would never find just one rock that shape..
3) some artifacts show clear signs of NOT being rocks...

Examples




In the center you can see a curved "pipe" with branches in a "v" in the center; two square "u" shaped objects, and the blue "cross"




This one has a wavy edge and curls around on the right, with little dots in each scallop of the wavy edge. It looks like a piece of bent corregated metal more than a rock..



This one has two areas with thin straight bars that are inter connected and crossing. I have never seen a rock do that and I have seen a lot of rocks


Conclusion:

Until we find further evidence either way, this case is open and requires further analysis. Because of this, the images on THIS PAGE are a collection of all the anomalies we found so far. They are presented for study and no comments other than the labels will be added here.

We will leave it up to the reader to examine them for themselves and make up their own minds. We are also currently seeking the high resolution .tiff images to assist us in making a determination.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 08:34 PM
link   
On Earth orange colored dirt is indicative of hematite and iron oxide associated with increased mineralization. You find it in Gold country and Copper country.



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrZERO I don’t want any Remote Viewers zeroing in on my coordinates.


DAGNABBIT! I keep fergettin bout them dudes... I guess looking out the window for black vans won't help spot them... I better get that titanium roof finished..

As to the algorythms here is a collection of white papers on defense imaging...

Ssshhh you didn't get it from me


www.mc.com...



Zorgon, what is your opinion in regards to the Tsiolkowsky anomaly?? Do you think it is a craft of some sort or buildings/complex?


I have difficulty with the whole masking thing really. Don't have enough knowledge on that to know how valid it is, though I have studied both sides as time allows...

The screen shot in question... I took that from a video with NERO capture and posted it...

It was an important find as the object that they were focusing on has the same look as the other "Peekaboo's" I found.. ( I am actually getting fond of that name
) namely the grouping of spheres connected by thin lines and the bulky "C" shape.

In the video the object looks like nothing I have seen in the still photos that show and "island". When I first looked into this project I was skeptical... it was these "ships" that keep showing up in images that convinced me...

So I go with Norm Bergrund and John... its a ship...


I have not yet completed the Tsiolkowsky page yet as its going to take more research... but one thing I have noticed many pictures show many different images of the same area...

However we DID find one of the tow handles in an old Lick Observatory image... just north and slightly left of Endymion...






Well... thats what it looks like to me...and its HUGE



posted on Mar, 8 2007 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
On Earth orange colored dirt is indicative of hematite and iron oxide associated with increased mineralization. You find it in Gold country and Copper country.


Oh yes quite right Limonite is yellow to orange Goethite is light brownish, white when really dry... hematite is ocher to red.. or blue black in spheres and nodules like the "blueberris" on Mars

Iron oxide is also known as rust...

water = iron = rust

no water?

oxygen + heat = rust

[you can do this at home... put oxygen from granmas tank into a glass jar [O is heavier than air] take kitchen tongs and some steel wool... light the steel wool with a match and dip in the oxygen POOF iron oxide... and a really cool bright flash


need one or the other


No oxygen... no rust



new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 108  109  110    112  113  114 >>

log in

join