John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS

Originally posted by greatlakes

Originally posted by johnlear

I know! I know! It's a milkdrop!

Are you saying the milkdrop animation is not an analogous model to impact craters and the study of the behavior of impact events John?

[edit on 6/24/2007 by greatlakes]

I would say that it isn't. Copernicus looks nothing like a milkdrop.

Have we seen a large impact on the lunar surface, eyewitness? If so, lets have a look at the video and put the matter to rest. Otherwise, all the mainstream modeldoes is present a fancy theory of events. The plasma cosmology model would put some additional twists on the impact model you show with the milkdrop.

It might be analgous. I have yet to see any proof that it is.

It is beneficial to remember that everything you "know" may or may not be true. It is still as yet untested, and therefore unproven.

It is obvious we don't know something important. And these somthings important are what keeps us in a state of compounded ignorance. Monkeys playing like people.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Have we seen a large impact on the lunar surface, eyewitness?

How big you want? There have been several rocket stages that supposedly crashed... anyone see the images of those? I heard that one crash made the moon ring like a bell for hours... surely that was big enough to make a little hole that we could see?

Originally posted by SpaceBits
Unmmm this is bad, were now going way off topic. can someone make a new thread kinda like a contiuation of this thread.

We have such a thread... started by brotherthebig...
www.abovetopsecret.com... and backed by Pegasus section...
landoflegends.us...

Your right we have drifted a little bit... I guess I will have to dig up some more anomalies to get us back in focus...

Originally posted by Access DeniedPowering a spacecraft in LEO with a tether is a different story.

Hmmm I don't recall saying THAT method was for Earth Power... Okay we were not quite on the same frequency then....

Originally posted by greatlakes
Ok so you just made the jump from "what is this, a caravan" to "omg its a definite 'convoy', a 600 ton one at that?

Funny I thought that post was in the Mars thread

Thats just amazing and sad at the same time.

Well as you have stated often enough, its my tabloid style... toss something out and see who is paying attention

So I guess I'll have to ask the questions: :shk:

What else CAN IT BE besides a convoy or caravan?

It could be some very strangely positioned rocks... the favorite answer of many here

It could be structures, it could be piles of rock layed out in order...
but it LOOKS like a convoy

What does image analysis show us, anything CONCLUSIVE?

Don't know haven't had time to analyze it yet. I am sure you have a conclusive answer though yes?

What does occams razor applied to this image tell us?

No idea... that tool is pretty dull these days... but I am sure you are itching to tell us what that really is

[edit on 24-6-2007 by zorgon]

zorgon & Access Denied, thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

OK, as you guys probably already know, finding the anomalies shown in the video I linked to is far from trivial as they don't specify any co-ords. - took me about an hour to figure that out...
What I did notice and as Access Denied suggested, is that even picking images at random, there are lots of blurry patches to be found, far to many to be 'editing' and look very much to be just 'overlaps' - I wasn't expecting that.

Makes finding man-made smudging much more difficult...

Originally posted by zorgon
It could be some very strangely positioned rocks... the favorite answer of many here

It could be structures, it could be piles of rock layed out in order...
but it LOOKS like a convoy

It is an odd image for sure, theres a lot of good ones on that site. Also the images there have been color adjusted to reflect the true colors we would see if standing on the planet. Most of the direct from NASA images of these little rovers have not been color adjusted (or as some say, nasa purposely kept the true color from the public) and thus appear very reddish in color.

One thing for sure though is the geology there has many differences than some of the geology found on Earth. For instance, the little blueberrys as there called, are everywhere on the ground. There are many other large differences there as well, and some more subtle differences. So what may look like a convoy, could be a convoy, or could be about hundred other things as well.

[edit on 6/25/2007 by greatlakes]

The space between the 'caravan' appears to be the same. But what it is, i have no idea. It could even be a artifact on the picture. So i'm not going to assume anything on it without more pictures from that spot.

Originally posted by greatlakes

So what may look like a convoy, could be a convoy, or could be about hundred other things as well.

You raise some interesting points greatlakes. If it wouldn't be too much trouble could we have the first 25? Don't bother putting them in any special order, just the first 25 'other things' that first come to your mind. Thanks!

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by greatlakes

So what may look like a convoy, could be a convoy, or could be about hundred other things as well.

If that aint trolling or completely useless as far as the thread goes, I'll go he...




You raise some interesting points greatlakes. If it wouldn't be too much trouble could we have the first 25? Don't bother putting them in any special order, just the first 25 'other things' that first come to your mind. Thanks!

Originally posted by omelette
OK, as you guys probably already know, finding the anomalies shown in the video I linked to is far from trivial as they don't specify any co-ords.

Yes that is one of my pet peeves... If there is an anomaly, why not at least show us the original? Many nay still not be able to see it, but at least those who can have a chance to verify it. There are some good sites that post all the image source data as we always do on ours. Now on some images scanned from books we can only point to the book, but at least you can buy a copy.

It makes it hard to track anomalies if you don't have that data. Those videos tend to do that a lot, but I have seen enough photos that I can recognize many.

As to the Clementine images...

The first Version
www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...

The first series was so poor quality and in jpeg that most anomalies people found could not be distinguished from pixel effect... yet the web is full of this...

On the other hand if there was an area of interest, it would be pretty easy to duplicate that "smudge" with little effort. I did notice on that old site that when I tried to get a closer res of certain areas... I got a "not available" notice...

What I found amusing is this notice on the front page of the older NAVY site...

The Naval Research Laboratory is not affiliated in any way with any organization selling lunar property or acreage on the moon. NRL has no involvement, either officially or unofficially, in providing "after-sales service" for the purchase of lunar property from the Lunar Embassy, its franchisees, or any similar organizations. Disputes arising from the purchase of lunar property from such organizations must be resolved with the seller directly."


The Second Version
www.nrl.navy.mil...

The second version, still in black and white, is better, but still not great. Those images however are created from the same data set as before."

Then along comes the Color Version...

You can get the .tiff's and .cub's here
ser.sese.asu.edu...

And the same image data created the really hi res full color images that are zoomable
pdsmaps.wr.usgs.gov...

Because of the obvious pixellation and other film, camera, missing data etc anomalies that are all over those images, we considered them useless for anomaly hunting as I said... other than to use as reference.

Now we have collected a lot of interesting images and I will catalog them because they are interesting... One in particular is the Area around Ukert Crater that Hoagland talks about... In the Clementine color image that area is "missing data" Rather convenient don't you think?

Its like this one... nothing suspicious, just missing data naturally





Continued next post... A little bit about Clementine...

Wherefore Art Thou Clementine?

The Clementine Satellite was named so as "it is only supposed to be
here for a short period of time and be lost and gone forever"
Back in the Color Clementine thread...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

We discussed the satellite and the fact that so many different official
sources had a different story to tell about what happened to it...
I have collected all the details so far on my site and will provide the
link shortly, but here are a couple interesting quotes. I will use my
comments from my page...

Here is the Department of Defense OFFICIAL report... after all it WAS
their satellite...

www.llnl.gov...

What I don't understand here is that the satellite left the moon May
5th on a path to the asteroid Geographos. Two days later on May 7th, it
malfunctioned and lost the fuel for attitude control, and went into a
spin. It had main thruster fuel. So how did a satellite spinning at 81
rpm manage to maneuver out of its path to the asteroid and return to
Earth, enter a stable geocentric orbit, and continue to take images
over Earth?

Also the mission to the asteroid was scrubbed because the images
wouldn't be useful (due to the spin?), but after this miraculous feat
of returning to earth without an attitude-control system, insertion
into orbit, and now its taking okay pictures of the Earth?
I am no rocket scientist, perhaps I am missing something?

Here is version two...
NASA Report pdf

According to NASA this report says it left the Moon on May 3rd, then
after the malfunction it went into a spin that could not be stopped.
Yet it returns to fly past the Moon on July 20, 1994 then goes into a
solar orbit... where they hope to be able to re-establish contact. In
otherwords IT'S STILL THERE

Now a USGS report...
astrogeology.usgs.gov...

say...Due to a malfunction on May 7th, 1994, Clementine exhausted its
fuel after the successful mapping of the lunar surface, and did not
complete the visit to the asteroid.

Now in this NAVY report on the front page of the V 2.0 mapper...
www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...

This report has Clementine acquiring radar data in December 1996
Here is another NASA source where they show how the Hubble image of
Aristarchus was CREATED... using Hubble and Clementine Data...
svs.gsfc.nasa.gov...

When we first found this site this was posted in the data set...
Data Collected:
HST: 2005/08/16 - 2005/08/21;
Clementine:1998/02/07-1999/06/25

Now it has been "corrected" after there were inquiries made (I believe

it was by JRA)

Data Collected:
HST: 2005/08/16 - 2005/08/21;
Clementine: 1994/02/26-1994/05/05

The following link is dead... found this in a cache file...
Task Force Report: Annex D

Clementine
launched 1994
1. map Moon;
2. visit Earth-crossing asteroid 1620 Geographos (but booster failed).
[Clementine 2 planned but on hold]

SOURCE: USGS Flagstaff Arizona
www.flag.wr.usgs.gov...

Comments:
Okay, this one says booster failure not fuel shortage....

Now here is one from NSSDC...
nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...

Excerpt
"Unfortunately, on May 7, 1994, after the first Earth transfer orbit, a malfunction aboard the craft caused one of the attitude control thrusters to fire for 11 minutes, using up its fuel supply and causing Clementine to spin at 80 rpm. Under these conditions, the asteroid flyby could not yield useful results, so the spacecraft was put into a geocentric orbit passing through the Van Allen radiation belts to test the various components on board. The mission ended in June 1994 when the power level onboard dropped to a point where the telemetry from the spacecraft was no longer intelligible. "

This NASA site has another variation of the story of Clementine. Now its not only taking photos of the Earth but studying the Van Allen Belt. DoD says 81 rpm, NASA says 80 rpm. Okay that is a small nit-picking amount I know, BUT these guys are rocket scientists, with the best computers, in a field where the slightest miscalculation could have drastic results... surely they could have their reports in agreement with each other?

This report ends Clementine June 1994. This one also says that Clementine was part of Strategic Defense Initiative Organization or "Star Wars" as it was called.

This one is now also a dead link...
www.spds.nasa.gov...

After 1976, the Moon was ignored by space probes until the U.S. Department of Defense's new Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO, aka "Star Wars") flew the Clementine 1 probe to map the Moon's surface with modern instruments, in conjunction with NASA. Clementine 1 arrived at the Moon in February 1994...

Clementine 1 entered a polar orbit around the Moon in order to map its entire surface. Clementine 1 orbited the Moon for more than two months, totalling over 300 orbits, from February 19 to May 5, 1994. Clementine 1 left lunar orbit to rendezvous with near Earth asteroid 1620 Geographos, but a computer malfunction caused the spacecraft to fail before it reached the asteroid...

This one says Clementine was part of Star Wars, left lunar orbit and was a COMPUTER MALFUNCION.

Here is the page on my website with the collected data
landoflegends.us...

Continued next post...

[edit on 25-6-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Have we seen a large impact on the lunar surface, eyewitness?

How big you want? There have been several rocket stages that supposedly crashed... anyone see the images of those? I heard that one crash made the moon ring like a bell for hours... surely that was big enough to make a little hole that we could see?

But a rocket stage is not a meteor. thinking from the perspective of the electric universe, there can be vast differences (not to mention speed variance).

But, my greater point is, are we just assuming that those marks are meteors? Without observing a meteor impact first hand, we only imagine its effects, do we not?

We see big craters and imagine that the most plausible explanation would be meteoric impacts. Occams razor, and all that jazz.

What proof is there outside supposition? Evidence is not proof, in my mind. Proof is irrefutable, evidence is not.

Let me explain. Perhaps in the past there were phenomenon that cause the ground to erupt? The crater (as shown by Gene Shoemaker) would be very similar. Who's to say that the bright spots, when excited further during particularly strong solar maximums, couldn't create outward electrical explosions and plasma emissions that create some of the craters we see?

I won't even get into alien intervention, like ourselves sending rockets up there to "ring the bell" and take measurements. That is even the jist of what "retiredafb" is saying with his apollo 20 video's: we were there 1.5 billion years ago in force.

[edit on 25-6-2007 by bigfatfurrytexan]

Wherefore Art Thou Clementine?

So I have two main questions....

1) WHY CAN THEY NOT GET THEIR STORY STRAIGHT?

2) WHAT HAPPENED TO IT AND JUST EXACTLY WHERE IS CLEMENTINE NOW?

Well I found the answer to some of this at the Department of Defense...

U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)
News Transcript
Tuesday, December 3, 1996 - 1:45 p.m.
Subject: Discovery of Ice on the Moon

Presenter:
Dr. Dwight Duston, Assistant Deputy for Technology,
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization;

Here is the main extract of relevance to Clementine

Q: Where is Clementine now?

A: The spacecraft, as you know, from the name Clementine, is only supposed to be here for a short period of time and be lost and gone forever, so it was intended for a very short period of time after this lunar mission, did a rendezvous with the earth, and shortly after that was shifted by the moon's gravity and continued a flight which will bring it back near the earth about nine years from now. So it's an 11 year total flight around the sun. So basically it's moving like a little planet around the sun, and it will bring it back close to us in about nine years... It's two years since it left us so it will be another nine years before it's back.

SO It would seem Clementine IS NOT LOST AND GONE FOREVER and in fact it is STILL OUT THERE...

Now at the very least the above presentation has established one thing beyond a shadow of a doubt... the various agencies involved are not telling us the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And they cannot even tell the same story.

It also shows us that while we talk a lot about what NASA is and is not, and we blame NASA for a lot of stuff... its not NASA thats behind the coverup... It seems they really are just a puppet front to feed us data...

The real information is found at different sources

A couple more really interesting extracts from the paper...


Water on the Moon....

A: As I mentioned, what we can tell from looking at the radar return is roughly the area that is covered by this. Assuming it reflects ice like ice on Mercury -- making that assumption. That's been well looked at. Then in order to see this back scatter effect, this roadside reflector effect; it's estimated that we have to see some number of wavelengths of our radar into the ice. In reviewing the paper, several of the reviewers posited we probably need to see somewhere between 50 and 100 wavelengths. So our wavelength is about six inches. So at the thickest case, it's roughly 50 feet.

Q: That translates to what in volume?

A: We were very conservative in the press release, but if you take basically 100 square kilometers by roughly 50 feet, you get a volume of something like a quarter of a cubic mile, I think it's on that order. It's a considerable amount, but it's not a huge glacier or anything like that.

Q: Can you compare that with something you know?

A: It's a lake. A small lake.

Star Wars...
Q: But the role of the so-called Star Wars system now has shifted to more of a surveillance, as opposed to shooting something down...

A: No, it is still based on shooting down ballistic missiles by impact with interceptors. So this technology is important in order to track and pass the track files on to the interceptors in order to allow them to hit their targets. So it's very much a part of the architecture.

Q: Can somebody address why this announcement is coming from the Pentagon? Why this is a Pentagon project? And if it suggests in any way any military use or contemplation of the use of the moon?

A...This was a low budget enterprise, so we decided to use a target that Mother Nature had put up for us, that was the moon. We could get totally adequate testing of all our sensors and our laser radar using the moon as opposed to paying millions of dollars of taxpayers' money for targets we would put up directly.

Q: So it was literally a target of opportunity.

A: Exactly (Laughter).

Oh yeah I guess you want the link now huh?

www.defenselink.mil...

Stay tuned....

Evidence of image tampering coming soon....

[edit on 25-6-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by Access Denied
Arthur: Now stand aside, worthy adversary.
Black Knight: 'Tis but a scratch.
Arthur: A scratch? Your arm's off!
Black Knight: No, it isn't.
Arthur: Well, what's that then?
Black Knight: I've had worse.
Arthur: You liar!

Anyway, I hope you know I still I love 'ya man!

Well Sir Black Knight... well met

Originally posted by Access Denied

Originally posted by zorgon
What do you think the response would be?

Got any pictures?

Yes surely... but what would that person have to do to prove those pictures are real? (Actually I like the polaroid idea mentioned in a UFO thread )

I think people take Zorgon's normally jovial and approachable demeanor to mean that he hasn't done his homework and will be easily debunked. It's a very carefully polished approach and not the result of cluelessness. If you are a debunker with ulterior motives, I suggest that you respect his thoroughness or you'll find yourself looking silly. If you're a skeptic with equally useful info, take care not to assume Zorg doesn't know what he's talking about or you'll cause those who would perhaps see your side, to ignore you on the premise that you're abusive to a pretty friendly and well researched person. (in short, it'll make you look like a debunker rather than a skeptic with useful info).

Interesting Clementine information.

if a particular program is gray, black or deep black cover stories would be concocted and adhered to. Black or deep black programs would have solid stories, even if they wouldn't make too much common sense, but the stories would be repeated robotically and verbatim most likely. A gray one however may be more 'loose' and not have the oversight scrutiny the other more sensitive programs would have. Perhaps thats what we're seeing here...

[edit on 6/25/2007 by greatlakes]

Thanks Undo and Great Lakes for those comments...

On that note I have a small announcement... This will be about Mars... but I am posting it here because it is relevant to "hidden in not so plain site" issues

PLEASE DO NOT ANSWER THIS IN THIS THREAD.... Go to Bluebirds Water and Forest thread.... where we are already discussing these topics on Mars

Thank You. I posted it here because this thread reaches the most of those interested and in a way it relates to the "convoy/caravan" search

PEGASUS PRESS RELEASE JUNE 25, 2007

A while back on several threads I have been teasing people with

lyle.org...

Its funny really, considering what is really at this site. And there is no way to get in from the front page. Now several people have already had the data but I asked them to keep it to themselves. The reason was that we wanted to copy all the images before the directory vanished, as has been happening to some of the great finds we have made over the past few months...

But now Orion437 has posted some of the other links to this site so "the cat is out of the bag" so to speak...

Before I provide the links though... I wish to discuss the "true color" images from Mars....

We have all seen the NASA version.... Too much RED



We have all seen the COUNTER NASA groups versions... Too much BLUE



Below is a specimen of Vesicula Basalt (Scoria) from the Nevada Desert... notice its blue gray tint...



Now here is one of the images from lyle.org... showing Vesicula Basalt (Scoria) on Mars. You will notice that the color matches pretty close on the two specimens... Now looking at the sand and the pale dusty blue sky you get a picture of what is the true color on Mars. (Funny how it looks a lot like the Nevada desert though ) You will also notice how clear this image is. I know undo and bluebird have been itching to show some of these. The image with the "pond" was from this source originally

True Color Of Mars...



The term used on this website is "radiometrically corrected" color images. The color marker on the rover is on each page for comparison...
It looks like this on this site..



You can easily see the red, green, yellow, and blue colors on the chart...

The directory that these images are from contain ALL the Spirit and Opportunity Color Images... It is in Prof Markoff's directory and I hope that it won't move once all you ATSer's bombard the site with hits.. a chance I will have to take as it was impossible to download all the images from here

Lyle.org - MER Raw Imagery - Color Rover Images

The directory that contains thousands of images is so long that it will not even finish loading on my or Undo's computer so we cannot download it We will just have to go through ALL the images and find the gems... which is why I am posting it now...

RESEARCH ASSISTANTS NEEDED

The directory that is so huge is this one...

Complete Directory Listing

The regular "Front Door" public entry is here

www.lyle.org...

Okay folkes have fun.... there are a LOT of fantastic images to look at here. Lets find the best and get them saved

But PLEASE on the Martian Thread.... Thanks
www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 25-6-2007 by zorgon]

Lear, and you trying to pass William L. Brian's work as your own is as laughable as the premise of the book Moongate:


www.apollo-hoax.me.uk...

Originally posted by Fowl Play
www.apollo-hoax.me.uk...

Never saw this site before.... Hey thanks for the link!!

He brings up a very good point...

How to fit a square peg into a round hole!

Just how DID they fit the Moon Buggy into that Lander? I never thought about that one before....

Nice find Fowl Play thanks

[edit on 25-6-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by zorgon

Its like this one... nothing suspicious, just missing data naturally

But what if it is missing data. What do you want them to do with the picture then? Remove it from the database or maybe copy and paste from something that matches that part? They can never do good if you think like this