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: 91
164
<< 88  89  90    92  93  94 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   
The interesting thing about this picture is, the terracing. the terracing is usually only seen in a crater, but this terracing is on a raised feature, like a plateau. to me it almost looks like a huge stepped pyramid that has been excavated out of the surrounding terrain


[edit on 6-2-2007 by undo]




posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 12:58 PM
link   
for new arrivals to the topic that haven't seen the clementine color anomalies thread, here's a list of some of the odd features found so far:

And God said, Let there be....
www.thestargates.com...
The Glass Dome
www.thestargates.com...
White Tank
www.thestargates.com...
Gold Ship
www.thestargates.com...
Gold Cone/ship
www.thestargates.com...
Floating Craters
www.thestargates.com...
Giant Snail
www.thestargates.com...
Eye of Ra
www.thestargates.com...
Bronzy
www.thestargates.com...
Mr. Fish
www.thestargates.com...
Wax On, Wax Off
thestargates.com...
Reiner Gamma (Full Version)
www.thestargates.com...
Aristarchus (Zorgon's copy of Mike's 10-inch telescope pic of Aristarchus)
homepage.ntlworld.com...
Global view (a portion of the lunar surface as seen in a more 3-D type of angle)
thestargates.com...
Blue Tubes
www.thestargates.com...
Translucent, Texturized Crater
www.thestargates.com...
Gold Ship Redux
www.thestargates.com...
Triple Pink
www.thestargates.com...
The Golden Triangle
www.thestargates.com...
Aristarchus, Kepler Crater from SteveR
img433.imageshack.us...
Gold Pit from SteveR
img264.imageshack.us...
Blue Crater Gem - From NASA's WorldWind Program
www.thestargates.com...
Ship Foot
artapprentice.net...
Ship Foot (Detail)
artapprentice.net...

Source
pdsmaps.wr.usgs.gov...
worldwind.arc.nasa.gov...



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 05:31 PM
link   
This is a photo of a huge city taken by Apollo 8 on the farside. (AS08-12-2209) NASA used airbrushed 'white ejecta' to cover most of it up. But there are little tiny glimpses of huge buildings underneath the 'ejecta'.

The city would be just north of Lomonosov (black crater center left) very near the eastern limb (under all the intensly white airbrushed 'ejecta'.

I have placed a green circle around what I call the 'spaceport' and what Richard C. Hoagland called an "airline terminal" in his comments about the artifact on the C2C George Noory show with me.



Here is a colorized closeup:



My question is "Can anybody see (what I am calling) the 'spaceport'? Or does it just look like a blur? Thanks.


JbT

posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlearMy question is "Can anybody see (what I am calling) the 'spaceport'? Or does it just look like a blur? Thanks.


I have to be honest.

Ive looked at this whole thread, saw most if not all the pictures. Ive seen what you can the "Car Park, with Ramp" in one picture, and many other things, now this "Space Port" and "Tube".

I have seen what you want me to look at, but Im not seeing what you are saying is there. I see highly blurred and terribly zoomed images of what look to me like features of a rocky martian surface. To me, I dont understand how even looking at these pictures for literal years (like you say you have, therfore the images pop out to you) could even begin to help you see these objects you are talking about.

In fact, I belive that staring at these images for years like you say you have, may be contributing to you seeing these images. I fear you may be seeing what you want to see in these pictures, and that is, possibly you are just making these images real in your mind after spending so long studying them.

Maybe nasa has gone to a good enough job to blurr out any feature that can be 100% proven as an object other than a Moon Rock. And, if you want me to belive that what you are pointing out in these pics is what you say it is, I want to hear you say for yourself that you too are seeing "highly blurred, terribly zoomed images" and that Im not just crazy and see basically nothing that can be confirmed as a structure intelligently made.

I dont mean to call you crazy, cause Im not, Im just saying that I feel the time you have spent on these images may be contributing to your ability to see objects in a negitive way becuase I sure as hell do not see anything I would put my reputation on... and thats whats driving me to ask you these question. You seem like a man that is sane, if not genius. So surly you wouldnt do anything to hurt your reputation unless you 200% belive your story.

So, to answer your question. Personaly, I see white rockly looking martian terain. I see what looks like Blurry white clouds and a pictures that is not even zoomed in enough to see much of even the astroid impact. Features that would be thousands of feet, if not miles long, are still blurry and not zoomed enough to make out geographic features to any detail.... let alone "a space port". What you call a tube with supports I see a couple bands of dark pixelation over a strip of white pixelation, I see nothing anywhere near enough detail to be called a "tube with bands".

Do you see any feature that would 100% link that picture to it being a "port" or any sort? Can you post pictures with more zoomed in detail, and less blurry?

[edit on 6-2-2007 by JbT]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by JbT

Originally posted by johnlearMy question is "Can anybody see (what I am calling) the 'spaceport'? Or does it just look like a blur? Thanks.


I have to be honest.

Ive looked at this whole thread, saw most if not all the pictures. Ive seen what you can the "Car Park, with Ramp" in one picture, and many other things, now this "Space Port" and "Tube".

I have seen what you want me to look at, but Im not seeing what you are saying is there. I see highly blurred and terribly zoomed images of what look to me like features of a rocky martian surface. To me, I dont understand how even looking at these pictures for literal years (like you say you have, therfore the images pop out to you) could even begin to help you see these objects you are talking about.
[edit on 6-2-2007 by JbT]


I agree for the most part, as people will look at these images, and their eye will fill in the missing areas, and it will turn into something real, simlilar to cloud shapes.

I do however believe that some of these images are interesting, in that they show large protrusions extruding off the surface, with what looks like some type of towers. I'm sure even those could be natural formations, we just don't have high enough resolution for definitive detail. I guess if NASA is manipulating these newer images, understanding how to do it myself in photoshop, no one would be able to see any evidence of tampering if done proper and professionally. Any image can be faked now adays with the software readily available. I think if we want to understand whats happening up there, we need another source for some untampered images, of which we won't get from NASA. I think these earlier images which weren't manipulated, just don't have enough resolution, especially if its not the source image, relayed through a scanner.


[edit on 6-2-2007 by Freezer]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
This is a photo of a huge city taken by Apollo 8 on the farside. (AS08-12-2209) NASA used airbrushed 'white ejecta' to cover most of it up. But there are little tiny glimpses of huge buildings underneath the 'ejecta'.

The city would be just north of Lomonosov (black crater center left) very near the eastern limb (under all the intensly white airbrushed 'ejecta'.

I have placed a green circle around what I call the 'spaceport' and what Richard C. Hoagland called an "airline terminal" in his comments about the artifact on the C2C George Noory show with me.



Here is a colorized closeup:

I do see the spaceport and many other incredible anomolies. The enlarged version of the spaceport is easier to see and make out if you step back from the screen or view from across the room.

John, I saw a similar Spaceport structure similar to this on Titon near the shoreline and we can take it to the bank humanoid life exists on Titon. Rik Riley



My question is "Can anybody see (what I am calling) the 'spaceport'? Or does it just look like a blur? Thanks.


[edit on 6-2-2007 by rikriley]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
'Downtown' some city on the moon (AS08-12-4209):

[



John this looks like a huge flying saucer or similar shaped building S.W. of the supposed black crater looking area. Everyone step back from your monitor and you will tend to see things better in the photo.

Since NASA won't come forward and give us the name of the city why don't you in this thread ask for suggestions on what to name the Some City on the Moon. My suggestion would be to call it Nut Bush City. Like the song Nut Bush City Limits. Rik Riley

[edit on 6-2-2007 by rikriley]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by rikriley
Originally posted by johnlear
'Downtown' some city on the moon (AS08-12-4209):


[




John this looks like a huge flying saucer or similar shaped building S.W. of the supposed black crater looking area. Everyone step back from your monitor and you will tend to see things better in the photo.


When Zorgon and I first worked with this picture he started to highlight the 'flying saucer'. I told him, no. Lets see if anybody notices it. You win rkriley. Zorgon, what do we have for rkriley?



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by JbT

I have to be honest. I have seen what you want me to look at, but Im not seeing what you are saying is there. I see highly blurred and terribly zoomed images of what look to me like features of a rocky martian surface. In fact, I belive that staring at these images for years like you say you have, may be contributing to you seeing these images. I fear you may be seeing what you want to see in these pictures, and that is, possibly you are just making these images real in your mind after spending so long studying them.


Thanks JbT, I really appreciate you taking the time to comment on this NASA photo. Yes, it is possible that I am seeing "what I want to see" and this is why I posted the photo. I wanted to record what everybody else 'sees'. Thanks again.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 10:48 PM
link   


Looks like a disc from afar, although up close the terrain pattern continues through the upper part of the hull.

I don't understand how they will keep hiding structures on the moon with the advent of new type of telescopes like the ones that use adaptive optics. They can construct many small mirrors working in unison to create a infinite mirror size. Of course this is all very expensive hardware, but sooner or later it will be built, and what will they do?

[edit on 6-2-2007 by Freezer]

[edit on 6-2-2007 by Freezer]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freezer
Looks like a disc from afar, although up close the terrain pattern continues through the upper part of the hull.


Excellent observation Freezer. What do you think? Possibly a moon quake at the exact instant of the photo or what?



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear

Originally posted by Freezer
Looks like a disc from afar, although up close the terrain pattern continues through the upper part of the hull.


Excellent observation Freezer. What do you think? Possibly a moon quake at the exact instant of the photo or what?


I think an ice crystal was blown across the lens after discipating within some swamp gas.


Actually I think its a natural geological formation which has a peculiar shape. I majored in product design, although I am a artist, and understand perspective decently well. To me it does present the general look of a ufo disc frisbee shape although when up close the terrrain pattern runs over it, suggesting thats the top of a ridge, and the edge.


:



[edit on 6-2-2007 by Freezer]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freezer

I don't understand how they will keep hiding structures on the moon with the advent of new type of telescopes like the ones that use adaptive optics.


Precisely and we have stated that even the big telescopes on Earth that COULD take such images won't...

Now why is that?

So for you lets review...

Endymion Crater Lick Observatory #1 1946



Deliberate blacked out areas not very good job, but then it WAS 1946..

Endymion Crater Lick Observatory #2 1946

This day was a little cloudy on the moon near Endymion.... Now on this image of the crater you can see the areas of interest to us are covered by ""clouds" that suddenly are more vertical than the sorrounding cloud cover... YES I said CLOUDS




Now here is a view taken by Mike in the UK with a 10 inch scope..




Compare the areas in the three images...Also pay close attention to the flat rectangular crater floor... This image was taken in 2005 by an independent source.

So it IS possible to get good moon pics from Earth...

so it begs the question.. why are there none?

BTW he also got a nice shot of the Blue Gem we call Aristarchus Crater in its full glory..




I have collected a lot of data about Aristarchus and will be presenting it as soon as time allows.


For Rik I have been saving a collection of well hidden "moonbies" LOL I will post them later this week



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 02:10 AM
link   
Well now, what goes on here?

I have just had the good fortune of reading some of Jack Vance, The Overworld which gave a new twist to the time worn cliche of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".

In that story a demon called Underheld from the world of La-Er lost some eye cusps which then became a means for ordinary men to behold a world starkly different than the one of mundane existence and a bonus property of equivalent change with the wearer.

I saw an immediate parallel with not just this thread, but with cyberspace as well. Many times authors have unwittingly played the roles of prophets and seers, especially in sci-fi. Mr. Vance is a fantasy writer, and I see no reason the same operations would elude him simply because of his genre.

It is already popularly accepted that cyberspace has such a quality, so that analogy is not lost on this audience. Taking the analogy further though is tougher. Does that mean we cannot see the world of the Moon as it truly is without the eye cusps of Underheld? Definitely not in a literal sense, true, but in a metaphorical sense could this be the case?

Thoughts to ponder.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 02:28 PM
link   
I feel like I just won the Price Is Right, come on down. LOL thanks for the recognition and anxiously await the new photos. Again thanks to both of you and Undo for your hardwork and supplying the group with incredible photos of the Earth's Moon. Rik Riley



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 05:59 PM
link   
this anomalie, extracted from the Lomonosov crater pic is an animation so that you can see the progression of the image from it's original rather blurry state, to the final product. if you have animations turned off, turn them back on to see this animation:





here's the highlighted piece, backed off so you can see it in the setting:





here it is without the highlighting:



this is right in front of the rim of Lomonosov crater


JbT

posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlearThanks JbT, I really appreciate you taking the time to comment on this NASA photo. Yes, it is possible that I am seeing "what I want to see" and this is why I posted the photo. I wanted to record what everybody else 'sees'. Thanks again.


No, thankyou John.

I really do appreciate what your doing here at ATS. Its truly our pleasure, as Im sure yours.

I just wanted to be very honest, and give you my opinion from someone who has been reading this whole thread, but not active in it.

Its not that I dont think there is something fishy going on up there, its just that like I said, I honestly cannot make features other than rock formations and cloud looking things. Which, in the end add to the conspiracy because why is there no good photo's? what are they hiding? Ect, ect.

Good job, and thankyou John!
Great work but the others too!



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 07:35 PM
link   
i have been following this thread and have seen some of what is pointed out and others, i have not. what i think needs to be restated again is that the anomolies featured..have light reflections, shadows, pixelation that shoud not be there if they were ...'natural' features..or there are areas that simply look like white, 'over exposed' areas or dark 'under exposed' areas that just should NOT be there. ..unless there is some form of cloud cover or un-naturely reflective material on the surface that NASA hasn't talked about yet.

i think a good added feature would be to show ..images of know earth features..that, may help put into perspective what is being looked at.
i think sceptic or zargon had a pic of a strip mine on earth, taken from 32 miles out?....that sorta gives perspective to what is being looked at on the moon....( sorry don't have that pic)....

i think we have a rare opportunity to view what may be something overlooked by the NASA censors...

in my view..these pics were suppose to stop at the 'oh golly..nice pictures of the moon' and NASA hoped, because of time constrants, that people would not question and look at these pics in minute detail with very new tech.....an oversite or...'whistle blower' for future generations?!?

are there two space programs?..one for the public and one that is 'private'?! with all the evidence...WE MUST QUESTION IT



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo
this anomalie, extracted from the Lomonosov crater pic is an animation so that you can see the progression of the image from it's original rather blurry state, to the final product. if you have animations turned off, turn them back on to see this animation:





here's the highlighted piece, backed off so you can see it in the setting:





here it is without the highlighting:



this is right in front of the rim of Lomonosov crater


Undo you are right on, the eliptical shaped tube is directly south and middle of Lomonosov. The elongated catipillar large building running North and South is behind the eliptical tube that also intersects with the bottom 3rd of the catipillar sectional building. Rik Riley

[edit on 7-2-2007 by rikriley]



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by JbT

Its not that I dont think there is something fishy going on up there, its just that like I said, I honestly cannot make features other than rock formations and cloud looking things. Which, in the end add to the conspiracy because why is there no good photo's? what are they hiding? Ect, ect.

Good job, and thankyou John!
Great work but the others too!


I think its really easy to make anything out these images. I did this with a earth based photo of dirt.





I mean no disrespect to those who have done so much work research and reviewing the photos, and I can easily believe there's bases and such there. With that said I think a lot of these images simply show natural formations, not to say you havent found a real base, but there's not enough resolution to make a statement and give a definitive answer. I thank Mr. Lear, and Zorgon, for the research information they've provided here, and again I mean no disrespect. I personaly believe there's something there, and its interesting to see all the images. If anyone hates NASA the most, its me
I think NASA is a bunch of liers who waste the taxpayers money on their own endevors, whether it be researching aliens or covering them up. One hint would be the fact they're still using the highly sophisticated 100 year old rocket technology.



Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Freezer

I don't understand how they will keep hiding structures on the moon with the advent of new type of telescopes like the ones that use adaptive optics.


Precisely and we have stated that even the big telescopes on Earth that COULD take such images won't...

Now why is that?


I think the people who operate and use the scopes aren't the type of people to believe in such ideas, and wouldn't give it the time of day. Time on these huge scopes are expensive as well. I still don't think any earth based telescope can yield enough resolution at this exact time. I do however believe that will change with adaptive optics, and technologies which could in concept have a mirror the size of the United States. No longer do we have to ground one large mirror, we can now use many small, easily manufactured mirrors to build a telescope any size we want. I'm sure the next big telescope manufactured will be using this technique, and thus be able to image the moon with so much resolution, it will seem like were standing on the surface. I look forward to how they'll deal with that situation.

Also had an idea. What if the astronmers of the world could cordinate digital scopes and snap images all at the same time, then compiling the images together using the same algorithims used for adaptive optic telescopes? Possible?




[edit on 7-2-2007 by Freezer]



new topics

top topics



 
164
<< 88  89  90    92  93  94 >>

log in

join