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: 221
164
<< 218  219  220    222  223  224 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 11:57 AM
link   
sherpa

do you think the japanese will be allowed
to show us what's up there?




posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 12:24 PM
link   
Isn't that the question on all our minds ?

Possible scenarios:

Revelation Japanese Moon satellite reveals structures on Moon !

Japanese Moon satellite takes great hi-def pictures of Moon rocks.

Japanese satellite technical failure mission over.

Japanese satellite explodes, (nah).

Japanese satellite technical failure only limited images gained.

Same old same old pictures taken a handfull of low resolution images will be available after carefull selection on website.

Heck I know which one I would prefer but think of the repercussions, nope I can't see it happening, however Japan please prove me wrong.

What's your spin ?



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   
sherpa,

well based on my other research area (ancient texts),
i'm skeptical that any government on earth will be allowed
to show us what's really going on out there. at least,
well, until they change their minds. lol



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Yes I must get on and read your book/books.

I have just been burning myself out looking through over a thousand moon pics on LPI and I ain't even half way through.

It's mind numbing when I realise I am looking for crumbs that may or may not have fallen through the sieve, I need a break from looking at images you tend to get to blase' about it so consequently miss something.

Well it will be interesting when the time comes for pictures from Kaguya to be released, I really needed better definition on those rocks.



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by sherpa
 


The problem is that if they take great pictures of the Moon surface but without any "anomaly" then people will dismiss them saying that they could not show the real photos or something like that.

Like those people that always ask for good photos of UFOs and complain saying that they are CGI when someone shows good photos, some people will never accept good pictures of the Moon if they do not show "anomalies".



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Yes I realise the dichotomy.

But for me it is interesting that old book scans can have more detail in then currently available hi-res images, and I am not talking specifically about anomalies, I mean just general landscape shape and texture.



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by sherpa
 


Sherpa........just wondering what do you use to view the images or magnify them? I am studying tons of images frfom mars global surveyor and use windows viewer to magnify but it gets very pixillated! Any suggestions?
thanx



posted on Oct, 10 2007 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by laserman-x
 


Get BIG images. The bigger, the better in most instances (however John and Zorgon have some good examples to the contrary, among others).

I use photoshop 6 or CS3 (depending on the task i am performing), but there are many decent ones out there that are free. Try GIMP (Google it). Its free and works pretty good.



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by laserman-x
 


laserman-x... use Windows Picture and Fax Viewer to get up close and personal on those anomalies. It doesn't pixelate nearly as much as some other viewers.



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by sherpa
What's your spin ?


Gonna go with


Japanese satellite explodes, (nah).

Japanese satellite technical failure only limited images gained.

"Same old same old pictures taken a handfull of low resolution images will be available after carefull selection on website."

OR

It follows Smart 1's path and gives us a new dust cloud to study

HEY I say we hurry up and make a good list and then draw numbers LOL

Those that guess right get a prize of some sort

BTW I love those fuzzy purple pictures you posted from Japan... the second one almost looks like the Lick Observatory on one page 23


Smart 1 The End




[edit on 11-10-2007 by zorgon]



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon


HEY I say we hurry up and make a good list





wonder if they'll look like the color moon pics from clementine...
at least, if it makes it, we'll have comparative examples for the color ones (these are supposed to be color images, yes?)



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


I don't know....those pics look awfully blue tinted.

I shoulda just sent my HP digital camera with them. Just over a hundred bucks and it can actually take TRUE COLOR pictures. The picture of my son on my desktop screen looks exactly like him in real life.



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by laserman-x
 


I would agree with both big and zarni, I am useing Photoshop 5 but only because it is free.


Windows Picture and Fax Viewer has been a recent addition on the recommendation of zarni in an earlier post, it does seem to do a slightly better job at high zoom, it can get a bit sluggish though on big images if you also have a few windows open at the same time, this is dependant on how much ram your running though.



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
The problem is that if they take great pictures of the Moon surface but without any "anomaly" then people will dismiss them saying that they could not show the real photos or something like that.


Well the problem with that is they TOOK real good images of the moon... from several missions... If there is nothing to hide, then there is no reason to keep those photos from the public...

So far every mission has failed to let us see the full res images. Perhaps Japan will give us Mars quality images of the moon... a fact skeptics will work hard at to overlook

I am patient... I can wait



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by sherpa
 


Thanx for your reply.thats what i have been using all along! i just thought maybe you seasoned pro's has a secret viewer or something along those lines! And to answer the your question im on xp with a gig of ram



posted on Oct, 11 2007 @ 11:11 PM
link   
The reason why those single frame images are so "fuzzy" is because this is an HD video camera (NOT STILL) being sent up - to take video. Not still images. They're simply cropping out these images for the public, while, they have full length videos - real time - of all the operations going on. I think we need to wait a week or two before they actually start releasing lunar videos from close up. That'll be really fun to watch, and, it's promised.

If for some reason they mysteriously decide to not release videos, well, I don't know. A lot of folks here may take that as confirmation of what they "know" to be on the moon already. We'll see though.

This can go 3 ways as far as I'm concerned.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
Well the problem with that is they TOOK real good images of the moon... from several missions... If there is nothing to hide, then there is no reason to keep those photos from the public...

You're right, that's why no images have been kept from the public.


Originally posted by zorgon

So far every mission has failed to let us see the full res images.

What evidence do you have to support that assertion? 200 pages and 4,000 posts later I still don't see any here.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Ok, another Borg ship released around the Moon.

Well actually it's really Vrad the second baby satellite onboard Kaguya.

Press release today announcing another milestone achieved in this mission.








www.jaxa.jp...



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied


Originally posted by zorgon

So far every mission has failed to let us see the full res images.

What evidence do you have to support that assertion? 200 pages and 4,000 posts later I still don't see any here.


There are many, many photos that are not available in a high resolution (tiff, best example) format on the Internet. The evidence for that is everywhere. There are also many photos that ARE available in a high resolution format. Same mission, same camera... why are some photos scanned for high res distribution and others in.jpg fomat


Storage is cheap these days. And I'd bet NASA could get an intern or two to work a weekend and scan 'em all in for a few hundred bucks.



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Access Denied
What evidence do you have to support that assertion? 200 pages and 4,000 posts later I still don't see any here.


Good grief here we go again..

You obviously missed this in the thread when we went through this with JRA... I am not going to waste time going over this again...

Show me where the full res images of Lunar Orbiter 1, 2 and 3 may be found... the entire set please not a few hand picked ones. The ones taken from 22 miles above the surface

Also please link me to the high res .tiff files of all the Apollo images that are displayed in jpg version at LPI

Several people have already ordered copies in tiff from JPL, only to find the file sent is merely an enlargement of the jpg

You also obviously missed the part where a directory that DID have some 50 - 60 meg tiff versions of the Apollo series were REMOVED while people here in this thread were downloading them... I still regret I did not save them all before posting the source...

Funny thing is the directory was at the same location that Gary McKinnon was caught snooping at JSC.

You know the old saying ..."Put up or......"

[edit on 12-10-2007 by zorgon]



new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 218  219  220    222  223  224 >>

log in

join