John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS, page 161
Pages: <<  158    159    160    161    162    163    164  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 123 times


reply posted on 3-6-2007 @ 05:51 PM by greatlakes
Originally posted by zorgon

There is also another thread here currently active that has given me cause for thought, as it is in direct connection to the theory that NASA and Space Command have it in mind to arm space and generally make us out the "bad guy" out there...


Of course the US wants to
weaponise space. Should not come as a revelation to any that have done any preliminary research into this area. The US government and military make little effort in HIDING or making this agenda secret, its all available for any that are willing to read it, on the web For starters, check out this video:


Google Video Link


And this book, "Space Weapons Earth Wars" by the Rand Corp.
The book if available in full (no need to purchase it, just click the pdf's)
www.rand.org...

Acquisition of National Security Space Programs
www.fas.org...

Space Control and the Role of Antisatellite Weapons
www.fas.org...

Prioritizing Army Space Needs
www.fas.org...

DOD Space Technology Guide
www.fas.org...

And lots more - all out there for anyone and everyone to find and is willing to spend some research time on the subject. I was going to start an ATS thread on the topic but haven't done so yet...

And quoted here:

"To make this transition (the goal to weaponize space), the US must overcome current legal and political impediments to doing so. It is assumed that the political will to weaponize space will lead to overcoming these obstacles. In addition to these hurdles, the USAF must overcome certain technical obstacles to make military operations from space a reality. The Air Force Scientific Advisory Board's report, New World Vistas: Air and Space Power for the 21st Century, outlines in great detail the technologies necessary to accomplish this objective."

From:Weaponization Of Space: Understanding Strategic and Technological Inevitabilities by Thomas D. Bell, Lt Col, USAF January 1999, Air War College, Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama

[edit on 3-6-2007 by greatlakes]



reply posted on 3-6-2007 @ 07:44 PM by tommyknockers
Earth based high resolution Moon imaging.

This guy:
www.mikeoates.org...
Is using:
Mak-Cass127mm focal length of 1500mm

I have my eye on a:
Orion SkyQuest XT12 305mm focal length 1500mm

Here are some samples of his results:

www.mikeoates.org...
www.mikeoates.org...

I have been thinking of getting a telescope anyway.
My question is do you guys think it may be worth all of
the trouble to try and duplicate what he has done here?

Other than this guys site most say dont even try, including NASA.


reply posted on 4-6-2007 @ 09:32 AM by tyranny22
I'm not sure if this helps or causes more questions. When I'm trying to determine a "fake" or whether a pic has been manipulated, the first thing I do is look for any "clone stamps," meaning identical spots that have been brushed together. However that doesn't apply to this image because "cloning" wasn't available to the developers of this image ... at least not digitally. It would have taken A LOT of work to "clone" something back in the 60's. So with this images I focuses on lack of detail and/or blurring of the image.

First, I combined all images by overlaying landmarks. Next, I dropped guides over all the crosshairs that I could find. Not all the crosshairs lined up perfectly. I suspect that there may have been a small tilt when the negatives were scanned, leading to a gradual difference as the guides progress across the image horizontally. It seemed to line up rather well vertically.

This image is a screen shot after I placed guides.


Notice the abundant crosshair marks at the bottom of the image and the lack of marks closer to the top. And I realize that I may have missed a couple, so please point these out if you find more. You can look at the difference both ways. Either the top of the image has been "touched-up" and crosshairs were not replaced, or the bottom of the image was "touched-up" and too many cross hairs were placed back into the image.

Here are a couple areas (in red) I believe to be doctored, either for lack of detail or for blurred spots that do not appear to be natural. These are just basic regions, I'm not attempting to pinpoint a specific spot:





reply posted on 4-6-2007 @ 09:59 AM by Rilence
Originally posted by tyranny22
I'm not sure if this helps or causes more questions. When I'm trying to determine a "fake" or whether a pic has been manipulated, the first thing I do is look for any "clone stamps," meaning identical spots that have been brushed together. However that doesn't apply to this image because "cloning" wasn't available to the developers of this image ... at least not digitally. It would have taken A LOT of work to "clone" something back in the 60's. So with this images I focuses on lack of detail and/or blurring of the image.

First, I combined all images by overlaying landmarks. Next, I dropped guides over all the crosshairs that I could find. Not all the crosshairs lined up perfectly. I suspect that there may have been a small tilt when the negatives were scanned, leading to a gradual difference as the guides progress across the image horizontally. It seemed to line up rather well vertically.

This image is a screen shot after I placed guides.


Notice the abundant crosshair marks at the bottom of the image and the lack of marks closer to the top. And I realize that I may have missed a couple, so please point these out if you find more. You can look at the difference both ways. Either the top of the image has been "touched-up" and crosshairs were not replaced, or the bottom of the image was "touched-up" and too many cross hairs were placed back into the image.

Here are a couple areas (in red) I believe to be doctored, either for lack of detail or for blurred spots that do not appear to be natural. These are just basic regions, I'm not attempting to pinpoint a specific spot:



Thankyou Tyranny22

The fact is the images used throughout this gianormous thread are mostly very old by any standard....Those who post try to gloss over this by saying, "Well, they're the best images we have..."

C'mon guys...Whilst I'm of the mind that there is something VERY strange going on on the moon, which is most likely attributed to humans, in my opinion, further back in human history than 40 yrs ago, not in the last 40 yrs as demonstrated by the "derelict" condition of much of the machinery outlined in this thread...

I would want to see recent images of the moon, 40 yr old images of the moon do not cut the mustard here, with regard to suggesting recent human goings on on the surface of the moon...

Thus far, on this thread, there have been none...Save for the Ari.C pics which show various parts of the crater glowing blue

Again, proving or disproving the reason why the crater glows blue , including its so called *cough* reactor of some sort requires those stating this case/opinion to put up a reasonable argument with regards to what has already been argued by common science...

This to my mind has not even remotely be done...

What a waste of a lot of people's time...




[edit on 4-6-2007 by Rilence]



reply posted on 4-6-2007 @ 02:21 PM by johnlear
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan



You have heard that incredibly ancient machines were found on Copernicus? Quantify "incredibly ancient", if you can.


This post was in regards to a post on this thread many months ago alleging that NASA had found ancient machines.

I believe that desparate attempts are being made by NASA to contain or limit the damage to their credibility with the pictures of the mining operations on the moon being posted on this thread.

They can't say its somebody else from earth because they are supposed to be in charge.

They can't say its aliens using bucket wheel excavators they'd look ridiculous.

Would this be related to the ship recently reported (and shown on YouTube) of the ship? It looked like it was incredibly ancient, too, and I seem to remember the time frame of 1.5 billion years. There is also a report of skeletons.

What would have caused this extinction? Obviously something big, right? They left the machines up there in mid action. The ship was left, and unrecovered bodies were left inside?

What happened? Where was the rest of their people? No one came back to check on their comrades or gear?


This video of an alleged spaceship and this story about skeletons would, in my opinion be NASA's Directorate of Disinformation at work in an attempt to deflect the portent, if not outright incrimination of the photos of current operations on the moon. How is NASA going to explain the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo programs if the public finds out we (the U.S) have been mining the moon since the early 60's?

Watch for posts that contain reference to mining equipment as 'ancient' or 'derelict' such as:

originally posted by greatlakes

.....not in the last 40 yrs as demonstrated by the "derelict" condition of much of the machinery outlined in this thread...


Do you see any 'derelict' machinery? I don't. I see operational machinery a huffin' and a puffin' up and down the sides of Copernicus.

NASA's hope was to dovetail the so-called 'back to the moon in 2024' effort so that it would look like we just got there. But the pictures on this thread are ruining everything. I'm pretty sure my day is complete.


reply posted on 4-6-2007 @ 03:27 PM by greatlakes
Originally posted by johnlear
Watch for posts that contain reference to mining equipment as 'ancient' or 'derelict' ...yada yada yada...

Yes WATCH OUT for those nefarious posts that mention "derelict" or "ancient"...within the posts or threads...

"YOU MEAN LIKE THIS POST???!!!

Originally posted by zorgon
The Ancient Derelict Excavator




zorgon mentions the words ANCIENT AND DERELICT in the SAME POST, O noes! Are you alluding then Lear that zorgon has switched to the DARK SIDE and is now posting NASA disinfo?

So which is it, are all of these crazy (AND HUGE I might add) contraptions of yours on the moon:

a) Ancient
b) Derelict
c) NASA built and transported via antigravity in the 60's
d) Soul Collectors
e) None of the above
f) All of the above



[edit on 4-6-2007 by greatlakes]
Pages: <<  158    159    160    161    162    163    164  >>    ^^TOP^^



Newfound "super-Earth"
  Posted 10 days ago with 56 member flags
Enceladus Backlit by Saturn
  Posted 4 days ago with 50 member flags
Toronto teens send Lego man into space: video
  Posted 17 days ago with 28 member flags
Current Potential Habitable Worlds - Update February 2012
  Posted 1 days ago with 24 member flags
Amazing new photo of Earth. The Blue Marble 2012
  Posted 14 days ago with 22 member flags
NASA Probe Captures 1st Video of Moon\'s Far Side
  Posted 10 days ago with 19 member flags
China publishes high-resolution full moon map
  Posted 5 days ago with 19 member flags