Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

NASA’s Moon Pics Slip-up!! Here’s The Evidence Of Artificial Structures!!

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by denythestatusquo

mikesingh:

Another great find and lets keep em' coming.
Why isn't somebody making a TV show on this stuff?


OK, You asked for it!! And there's more on the way!! Saving the best for later!!


NASA as we all know has a separate dept for airbrushing photographs having the slightest hint of any evidence of life on planets or their moons.

There are umpteen examples of this ham handed airbrushing done by tyros at NASA. Hell, they need to get experts to do the job, otherwise their cover is gonna blow! Which has now!

Have a look at the pics of the Moon, below. Note the artificial structures marked by arrows, which were mercifully spared of tampering, not by design, but by default.

My hats off to JP Skipper, of Mars Anomaly Research, for spending long hours exposing perhaps one of the greatest conspiracies of all time!


Courtesy: JP Skipper

Notice the artificial structure marked by the arrows.
This guy at NASA needs to be sacked for doing such
a poor airbrush job!


Leaving the best for the last, here's something that's sure to get you guys blown away!


Courtesy: JP Skipper

Check out the areas pointed out by the green arrows. Even though considerably compromised by image tampering, the perfect rigid uniform right angle geometry and parallel line evidence is undeniable.

Can this arrow straight and right angle geometry be associated with natural geology in any way? Is this incontrovertible evidence of artificiality of some kind?


Details




[edit on 5-11-2006 by mikesingh]




posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 03:44 AM
link   
God JP!!! You are so awesome! So are whales. . . Uh. . What the F am I looking at???? Too bad the pics are so distant that I cant see anything.


Nice work!! Keep it up!


AA knows the way. ..



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 11:16 AM
link   
I have to say I'm not totally convinced of all this structures on the the Moon talk I dunno I guess it is possible!

What I think would be pretty much definate evidence, is if you could get 2 seperate pictures, taken at different times of the same area, If the exact same blurring is in the same place then I think I would be convinced, is it possible to do this?



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Wow, you can successfully post blurry pictures and call them evidence....good job!



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Although the first pic looks like it could be something, and that crater on the upper left sort of looks like an upside down jelly fish in a way.
The second pic you posted just looks like a camera glitch in the picture to me, or possibly the result of a printer in need of repairs.

Keep looking, I want more, thanks!



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 11:47 AM
link   
i have one problam with that.

you can say that nasa is airbrushing the pictures but anyone can claim that other doctoring technique was used in this photo.

i must add the the pictures are in very poor quality, plus it would be nice if you can post some credentials to this info. i mean besides a link to a site that deals exclusively in moon anomalous.

thanks in advance.



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Here's your credentials...




This is from the Clementine Navy image browser:
www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...


This structure is at:

Longitude = - 70
Latitude = 137

(choose Resolution = 1pixel per 1 Kilometer / 768 )


This image, and the others posted above are also available through the Clementine Navy image browser.



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 12:06 PM
link   
this is not the same picture that he posted. if you are trying to prove the brushing then you pushed an open door, i also think that there are some weird stuff going on the moon.

nonetheless, it does make you ponder.




[edit on 5-11-2006 by DeMitsuko]



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 12:10 PM
link   
You know, that sure does look like airbrushing...

I think we may have caught NASA red handed.



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Isnt a little crude or brute to airbrush a pic like that? I would prefer to hide the pic at all...airbrushin like that would be a shame.



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 12:20 PM
link   
ok one more thing... and ill play the devil advocate in this:

do someone else note that the pictures seems distorted as a ALL rather pinpoint airbrushing?

i refer to the two pictures that started this thread, mainly the second one.



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ZoooMer
Here's your credentials...




This is from the Clementine Navy image browser:
www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...


This structure is at:

Longitude = - 70
Latitude = 137

(choose Resolution = 1pixel per 1 Kilometer / 768 )


This image, and the others posted above are also available through the Clementine Navy image browser.




I couldn't get those coordinates to work. Maybe they've removed the photos.

It does look odd, however I can see through the airbrushing in some spots, or whatever the blurring is, and I can see the contours of the crater etc underneath, so it's odd that someone would airbrush unnecessary areas where there was only moonscape while leaving a seemingly suspicious object un-brushed?






[edit on 5-11-2006 by probedbygrays]



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   
I would appreciate a corresponding NASA or Clementine Picture number for reference... there are thousands to hunt through...

Usually the Mars Anomaly sight does do that but I did not spot any photo ID number on this set...



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 04:32 PM
link   
I just cannot understand why NASA would do such a poor job at airbrushing these photos ?



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by helium3
I just cannot understand why NASA would do such a poor job at airbrushing these photos ?


Yes I am inclined to agree with you.

Even back in the day they could have done a much better job. These look a lot like compression artifacts. Of course, if they couldn't airbrush something out transparently enough they might have deliberately made it look like a compression error...

In addition I don't really understand why NASA are using lossy compression on these photographs. I believe the purpose of the mission was to get as detailed photographs of the surface of the moon as possible. That implies lossless compression.



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   
It's obviously a data glitch combined with compression artifacts.

Think. Why would these supposed artificial structures be magically perfectly aligned
with the x-y axes of the CCD taking the picture on the spacecraft at any moment?



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 07:52 PM
link   
Try: 5N 340E




Incidentally I found that location by looking up where those high res photos posted by John Lear were supposedly taken.



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 07:56 PM
link   
Good job once again Mike! Keep em' coming.

I have to wonder how NASA could be so sloppy too but I can only put it down to arrogance which is no misplaced it appears. They definitely have things here to cover up from our inquiring eyes and I have to wonder if this is why they haven't been in a rush back to the moon all these years.



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yandros

Even back in the day they could have done a much better job.


LOL

"Back in the day" they used q-tip swabs with developer fluid to smudge spots they didn't want seen... NOT AIRBRUSH!!

They also never anticipated modern computers with digital imaging capability in every home either...

Research is a wonderful tool



posted on Nov, 5 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Yandros
Try: 5N 340E




Incidentally I found that location by looking up where those high res photos posted by John Lear were supposedly taken.


Yeah you got it!! But the location of my second pic is on the extreme left edge of the B/W image marked by you. Enlarge your image and have a look.

And, could you give your pic number? I think Zorgon wanted it.

Thanx!


[edit on 5-11-2006 by mikesingh]





new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join