Originally posted by johnlear
These are the 2 photos of Endymion. The one on the left was was taken by the Lick Observatory (presumably with the Yerkes 36") in 1946. The one on the right was taken later. Probably.

*snip*

Whats interesting is that they went to great lengths to obscure portions of Endymion but completely neglected the archway or bridge to the northwest.

I would appreciate your comments.

Personally, I would call that a shadow, just like every other shadow on that same side in every other crater in that photo.

Why are you looking at very bad quality photos, attempting to see things, then attribute them to a clearer picture? If you're going to see things, at least use the best quality first. It's just plain desperate to use an unclear image to explain a clear image. You've got it backwards.

This is Mare Crisium. It is located on the eastern portion of the face of the moon that we see. Promontory Agaram is located at the 1 o'clock position. It is that white, high mass of land jutting out into the sea. I have rotated the photo of the moon 70 degrees counterclockwise for all of these photos.




This is a slightly enlarged view of Promontory Agaram. It seems to have a strange object like a crane hanging over it but of course that could be a visual deception.



This is a close up view of the dancing elephants. Of course, there are no dancing elephants. But there are 2 huge arches arcing from the center of the white area on the left up to the right and connecting with the white area above. Of course this is just my impression. The arches reminded me of elephants trunks. But I do seem to see black on the other side of the arches which would, in fact, make them huge arches. The arch in front seems to be casting a shadow below it, but the arch, if it is an arch, in back, does not. I asked NASA for Clementine photos of Promontory Agaram but they told me that none were taken of this area. Too bad. They might have been interesting.

Originally posted by johnlear
I asked NASA for Clementine photos of Promontory Agaram but they told me that none were taken of this area. Too bad. They might have been interesting.

John, a few pages back you advised me not to waste any time studying the Clementine pictures, when I posted one, because NASA has airbrushed them, and not to look at anythimg taken prior to the Lunar Orbiter pictures !

Originally posted by violet

a few pages back you advised me not to waste any time studying the Clementine pictures, when I posted one, because NASA has airbrushed them, and not to look at anythimg taken prior to the Lunar Orbiter pictures !

The question?

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by violet

a few pages back you advised me not to waste any time studying the Clementine pictures, when I posted one, because NASA has airbrushed them, and not to look at anythimg taken prior to the Lunar Orbiter pictures !

The question?

It was more of a comment.
I am just wonderng why you say you want to have a look at a Clem pic, to see if anything shows, after you say there is no point, that's all !

Originally posted by violet

It was more of a comment.
I am just wonderng why you say you want to have a look at a Clem pic, to see if anything shows, after you say there is no point, that's all !

Clementine was launched in 1994. I asked for pictures of Promontory Agaram as soon as they were available. Considering the scope of the mission it was unlikely that they didn't have photos of Mare Crisium, they just didn't want to give them to me. If they didn't want to give me the good stuff what chance was there that any of the rest of the photos would be good? But be my guest. Check out Clementine, look for close ups of Copernicus, Agaram, de la Rue, Endymion, Bulialdus, Triesnecker, Ukert. All the structures will still be there. I was just trying to save you the trouble of looking for something I didn't think was there. Let me know. Thanks.

yes, there could be a crane in that picture...

or it could be a visual deception...

thanks...

John,

What size scope would be needed to observe Copernicus from Earth?

How much detail could you get from, say, a US$250k scope?

The scope would be located in very remote country, far far away from any lights.

Cheers

JS

Originally posted by jumpspace

John,

What size scope would be needed to observe Copernicus from Earth?

How much detail could you get from, say, a US$250k scope?

The scope would be located in very remote country, far far away from any lights.

Cheers

JS

I don't know very much about telescopes. The Lick photos were taken with the 36" Yerkes I believe. If you could attach a digital camera to a 36" telescope you could take pictures which would present images equal to those I posted of the dancing elephants. You might be able to attach a binocular to the 36" scope to relieve eyestrain and look around for cool stuff. But I don't think you will be able to see the mining equipment chugging around on Copernicus.

I have an old 8 inch Celestron with a binocular attachment. It is very entertaining but the drawback is the equatorial drive requires 110V. So I have to be near the house or have the car running to drive the power supply.

Regarding the detail that a scope can see is not the money it costs it is the diameter.

I am sure that there are a lot of members on ATS than can provide much better and more detailed information than I can.

I wonder where zorgon has been. I've been waiting for his picture posts. I'm not very good at that part

So, what's our next homework assignment John?

Originally posted by johnlear
Yes. Tried to post the pictures last night but had a problem.

If you continue to have problems just email it to me and I can post it

You have voted zorgon for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


Your tenacity is unmatched.
Good stuff.

Originally posted by MrPenny
An incredibly effective security blanket and information blackout hides a "space corp" from the world for 3 decades. Zip, nada, zilch evidence exists that other planets in this solar system have an Earth-like ecosystem, with comparable gravity, atmosphere, and life.

Refer to my post above and consider carefully what NASA might be capable off if they can fake the colour of an entire planet and get away with it for so many decades. Your surprisingly arrogant for someone so easily fooled! I am slowly seeing what they are allowing me to see ( i don't belief the scale of the 'accidental' slip ups is by chance) but that still required a open mind and the acceptance that i have been fooled thus far.

But, incredibly enough, these photos happen to 'slip' through with the lamest evidence of structures and activity on the Earth's moon.

Evidence always seems 'lame' when it suggest alternative explanations to your own ( not really but that's what makes propaganda so wonderful) and that's why having predispositions can make you so blind to observed reality.

In all of this...how did the photos miss the alleged, 6 mile high tower.....allegedly located dead center on Near Side?

Hey look!!!....Them's footprints!!!!

They either 'missed' it by accident or someone took a chance , with his life, and let the information out OR it is something they want you to see and learn to deny all by yourself. After training sheep to avoid wires ( that carry electricity) you can simply put if off and it takes considerable hunger pains for them to figure out that there is no more danger. Just like the sheep the western public has been so well conditioned that they will now avoid certain areas on their own accord despite the fast decreasing 'danger' to anything but their own assisted preconceived notions.

Stellar

Originally posted by Apass
What spheres?

The picture I posted for you DID have grey in the center where the "spheres" are, not just black and white... the one you pointed out in this post is NOT the one..

Nevermind, its obvious you do not see what I am refering to so lets agree to disagree...



Beside I have more anomalies to find

[edit on 4-10-2006 by zorgon]