John Lear's Moon Pictures on ATS

Okay, I can't seem to figure out how to make an image appear in the post. Can someone give me a quick lesson on what the code is, please. Here's the external link:



Edit 1: Ack! lol.

Edit 2: Hope this works.


[edit on 15-2-2007 by papajake]


[edit on 15-2-2007 by papajake]

Originally posted by papajake
Okay, I can't seem to figure out how to make an image appear in the post. Can someone give me a quick lesson on what the code is, please. Here's the external link:



Edit 1: Ack! lol.

Edit 2: Hope this works.


[edit on 15-2-2007 by papajake]


[edit on 15-2-2007 by papajake]

We have wondered where the design of the Oscar came from and now we know LOL . Seriously the double face that you have highlighted is similar to the faces of the statues I have painted on the surface of Mars. You can go one degree on the same statue there will be a different face another degree another face another degree another face etc. etc. Many of the statues on the Earth's Moon as well as Mercury and Mars share the same face and eyes on the bust statues. Good Work------------Rik Riley

Originally posted by papajake
Okay, I can't seem to figure out how to make an image appear in the post. Can someone give me a quick lesson on what the code is, please. Here's the external link:



Edit 1: Ack! lol.

Edit 2: Hope this works.


[edit on 15-2-2007 by papajake]


[edit on 15-2-2007 by papajake]

We have wondered where the design of the Oscar came from and now we know LOL . Seriously the double face that you have highlighted is similar to the faces of the statues I have painted on the surface of Mars. You can go one degree on the same statue there will be a different face another degree another face another degree another face etc. etc. Many of the statues on the Earth's Moon as well as Mercury and Mars share the same face and eyes on the bust statues. Good Work------------Rik Riley

Keith Laney site photos are very interesting to say the least! Egads, the
anomalies are so thick, you can't look an inch in any direction without finding another one or two or ten!

Could you please show just the enhanced photo without the emphasis on the supposed anomalies? It might help me to visualize this without the aid of a color outline. The reason that I'm asking this is because I'm not seeing it in any other photo than the one that's been enhanced. The enhanced one is actually lighter than the original. That's why I want to see it instead; the gamma being turned up is what makes it so lucrative for me.

Thanks in advance,

TheBorg

Originally posted by TheBorg
Could you please show just the enhanced photo without the emphasis on the supposed anomalies?

I realized after I uploaded the colorized image that I should have also included the non-colorized version. Here it is:

The enhanced one is actually lighter than the original.

That is why I posted these images. What I found when adjusting the levels to the lighter version, is that oddities would emerge from the darkness. I don't have enough faith in the low quality image to say one way or another what they are, I just thought the process was exposing the images was interesting. Also, at this point, I have no idea what Keith Laney has done to the photos on his website. For all I know he could have distorted the photo so much that he could have actually caused the anomolies. I tried with no luck to find high-res photos.

Small off topic question:






You can see stars (?) on only one of the two same pictures. Are stars supressed to make more clean images?

Originally posted by looofo
You can see stars (?) on only one of the two same pictures. Are stars supressed to make more clean images?

I can only see dust, not stars, in the photo from the second link.

You can see that even the shadow of the hills on the Moon have "stars".

They should have cleaned the scanner first.

Originally posted by looofo
Small off topic question:






You can see stars (?) on only one of the two same pictures. Are stars supressed to make more clean images?

Looofo, I don't think they are stars, its dust.
Who ever made the second image didn't clean the screen when making a contact. IMHO.
Spyke

Originally posted by ArMaP
You can see that even the shadow of the hills on the Moon have "stars".

Right, I should have noted this!

structures in crater



floating craters again


keithlaney.net...

[edit on 16-2-2007 by undo]

alot of structures



keithlaney.net...


[edit on 17-2-2007 by undo]

this one doesn't make sense. the shadow cast by the thingy on the right is confusing



keithlaney.net...

erm, um, uh, a thing


keithlaney.net...


nose cone reflection of the surface


keithlaney.net...


[edit on 17-2-2007 by undo]

By now I have surmized that some craters are not actually floating but have been placed in the photo above a specific area to hide what is actually there on the Moon. Some of the so called looking craters are the tops of structures just look below them.

The so called craters on the surface are not actually what I would call craters. These impressions are mostly where mining operations have taken place and cities and structures have been built inside for strategic protection.

If so many so called craters were direct hits by astroids or meteors on the Moon my theory is that the Earth would look the same way. Yes I relize the Earth's atmosphere protects us to a certain point but I do not buy that the impressions on the Moon were created by continual direct hits by meteors.

Another alternative explanation in my eyes is in the past there could of been direct hits by nukes. Surely human beings would not bring war against there neighbor. Rik Riley

[edit on 17-2-2007 by rikriley]

Originally posted by rikriley
If so many so called craters were direct hits by astroids or meteors on the Moon my theory is that the Earth would look the same way. Yes I relize the Earth's atmosphere protects us to a certain point but I do not buy that the impressions on the Moon were created by continual direct hits by meteors.

Craters on Earth's surface are hidden by vegetation and destroyed by rain, winds, earthquakes, etc. Also, most of the Eath's surface is covered by water.

Because of that, only the bigger craters on Earth are clearly visible today.

If you search for them you will find them.

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by rikriley
If so many so called craters were direct hits by astroids or meteors on the Moon my theory is that the Earth would look the same way. Yes I relize the Earth's atmosphere protects us to a certain point but I do not buy that the impressions on the Moon were created by continual direct hits by meteors.

Craters on Earth's surface are hidden by vegetation and destroyed by rain, winds, earthquakes, etc. Also, most of the Eath's surface is covered by water.

Because of that, only the bigger craters on Earth are clearly visible today.

If you search for them you will find them.

I do relize this but I feel there would be alot more evidence even with wind, rain, eroison, Volcanoes, beneath the oceans and over growth. Yes there are places across this Earth where impacts have occured and are still visible. My point is this I still think the majority of the so called craters were created by mining on the Moon by Moonbies, humanoid Moon beings, or Aliens. Rik Riley

Originally posted by rikriley
My point is this I still think the majority of the so called craters were created by mining on the Moon by Moonbies, humanoid Moon beings, or Aliens. Rik Riley

Sometimes it would be better to be blind than to read this kind of nonsense.

What is that on the right side of this apollo 16 image?

On page 59/60 of this thread we analysed King crater, a tip of J.Lear. Found a high def picture of it at keithlaney (1800x1226).