Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Infrared Moon Images

page: 2
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Well, here's something interesting.

From HubbleSite


The color composite in the lower right focuses on the 26-mile-diameter (42-kilometer-diameter) Aristarchus impact crater, and employs ultraviolet- to visible-color-ratio information to accentuate differences that are potentially diagnostic of ilmenite- (i.e, titanium oxide) bearing materials as well as pyroclastic glasses.


From Galleries.com



It crystallizes out of a magma relatively early before most of the other minerals. As a result, the heavier crystals of ilmenite fall to the bottom of the magma chamber and collect in layers. It is these layers that constitute a rich ore body for titanium miners.


Titanium miners, huh. This is on the same page:


Since that time, titanium has been shown to be a strong aluminum-like metal; light weight, non-corrosive, able to withstand temperature extremes (especially its high melting point, 1800 degrees C) and it has good strength (as strong as steel and twice as strong as aluminum). Titanium alloys have found many applications in high tech airplanes, missiles, space vehicles and even in surgical implants.


How convenient. Is that part of what the Apollo missions saw? Which is why we don't go back?




posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
This is a photo taken of Aristarchus by Apollo 15. It was on a weekend after they had rolled up the highways, closed the tunnels, turned off the reactor and were sipping that famous lunar malt liquor under a saffron colored sky.




So are we to assume this is a NASA airbrushed job ? It looks like if they did airbrush it, is is rather well done in my opinion. Im not sure if i can accpet the theory that there is a reactor there and roads. I would like to believe it, but i dont see the evidence to support it yet.

IMO of course.

Thank you anyway John, it is great to talk on ATS with you, as i have enjoyed a lot of your discussions on C2C and ATS.

Peace.

P.S - Actually, the more i look at this picture above John, the more i can see that the white just doesnt look natural, and suggests to me that it is indeed airbrushed. It just does not look right the more and more i stare at it.


[edit on 8-8-2007 by 1234567]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Hey John thanks for your reply thats made things alot clearer for a n00b like myself. I do have a couple more questions for you because I'm sure you have nothing better to do than spend your time educating me
Ok...
1) Are you saying that the picture you posted from Apollo 15 is airbrushed? Or are you saying that the powers that be physically cleared the area before the photo was taken?
2) I'm sure you must have been asked this one before, but here goes - How is it that you came to have access to so much varied information relating to conspiracies, ufos etc ? What I mean is usually someone will provide information that specifically relates to one or two subjects as they have had direct access, but you seem to have information that relates to many varied "secret" subjects.

I hope that makes sense its been a long night. Many thanks



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 06:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by 1234567

Originally posted by johnlear
This is a photo taken of Aristarchus by Apollo 15. It was on a weekend after they had rolled up the highways, closed the tunnels, turned off the reactor and were sipping that famous lunar malt liquor under a saffron colored sky.




So are we to assume this is a NASA airbrushed job ? It looks like if they did airbrush it, is is rather well done in my opinion. Im not sure if i can accpet the theory that there is a reactor there and roads. I would like to believe it, but i dont see the evidence to support it yet.

IMO of course.

Thank you anyway John, it is great to talk on ATS with you, as i have enjoyed a lot of your discussions on C2C and ATS.

Peace.

P.S - Actually, the more i look at this picture above John, the more i can see that the white just doesnt look natural, and suggests to me that it is indeed airbrushed. It just does not look right the more and more i stare at it.


I agree the more I look at the level of 'whiteness' compared to the crater edge next to it, the more I think it has been doctored. Surly the edges of both craters should be of the same level of whiteness. The shadow from the right hand side of the craters do not match up, they look squewiff!



[edit on 8-8-2007 by Havalon]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 06:37 AM
link   
Yes i agree too. The shadows just dont seem to be similar as i would have expected. Also i agree with your statement about the Whiteness of the crater compared to the other craters


What should make this crater more white than the others ?

NASA airbrushing in tooo much white...
Different rocks / minerals on the surface reflecting sunlight differently..

Peace.

P.S -
here is another interesting image


more moon images


[edit on 8-8-2007 by 1234567]

[edit on 8-8-2007 by 1234567]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:05 AM
link   
I agree, that picture just didn't look right.
I did some fiddling and came up with this:


Bottom left: The area in and around the crater was different in colour, saturation and brightness from the surrounding ground.

It looks like freshly fallen snow in texture, more powdery and fine. Could it have been placed there? More likely it was shopped there. I put a small red outline around the area in question (potentially doctored). This red perimeter demarcates the 'feathering' area. it is on this line that a faded change occurs from the crater to it's surroundings. You length of the fade is almost uniform throughout. Which further suggests image manipulation. The thicker short red lines at the bottom show where blatant features ('ridges' etc) fade from full clarity to the 'soft' stuff.

Even a basic unsharp mask (main pic) picks up the blatant difference in ground texture and colour.

I'd love to see more pictures like this!

This pic just doesn't look right, though it may be.
Where there's smoke there's fire.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:12 AM
link   
Even this pic from another angle further pushes my point.




Does it not look like a whole mess of dirt was put there? Note a higher ridge of soft dirt joining the two feature craters.

If there were a base there and there was suspicion, then any photos taken of the area would be known about well in advance allowing plenty of time to prepare.

The dirt looks 'placed'. it so different from everything else, hasn't had time to settle like it's surrounds.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:49 AM
link   
Thanks for the Appolo link 1234567, I've bookmarked it for further viewing later. Great thread btw
& flagged.
Nice analysis Spec01 you have a good future here I think.

I (being a relative nooby myself) have a question for John Lear (forgive me for not researching this earlier, but I wanted to keep within the context timing of the unfolding of this thread).
If this picture was taken by Appolo 15 and we are saying that under the ‘airbrushing’ by NASA there is a fusion reactor, when and by whom was the construction completed?



[edit on 8-8-2007 by Havalon]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:31 AM
link   
[edit on 8-8-2007 by Havalon]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by jamestkirk
this is the only moon photo that i actually can perceive some sort of structure and is the most compelling evidence for me.


That should tell you something right there.



i have a hard time with the copernicus photo's.


Which is understandable. There is nothing there to see. How many times do you have to take a picture of a dog before it looks like a dog. Even if you disguise it, you could look at it and still see a dog there without much effort. Now, how hard do you have to look in those photo's to see what John claims? I'm not saying that he is wrong, I just like to let logic and common sense do some of the work for me. Either way, you have to repsect John's tenacity.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 11:01 AM
link   
I'm new to this site, but I have heard the theory about NASA already having moon bases bulit. While I find the pictures a little odd, I don't see anything very convincing, except for the infrared images, which provide some evidence of something that shouldn't be there.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Alright, I see some funny stuff in this picture. Still not completely convinced, though. But it does seem funny that Aristarchus looks older than the crater directly to the right of it, which is mostly filled in. Shouldn't Aristarchus be filled in as well? What forces on the moon, (tides maybe?), can move the dust and fill in those craters? What about those obvious flows? Definately doesn't look naturally occuring the more I look at it. And it does look like the soil surrounding Aristarchus looks newer and built up.





posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 11:10 AM
link   
So what are the conclusions here, is this a base built by aliens or a base built by humans or is this something to do with the spaceship moon theory



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 11:19 AM
link   
I have no idea. But it is very odd that the public doesn't have access to high res images of our closest neighbor. It's relatively small, and has low gravity. So a high res, stereoscopic imaging satellite (I don't think thats whats up there, but that would great), orbiting fairly close to the surface, sending back pictures should be mindblowing. Instead, we get images with the same resolution that you get with a 10" scope from Earth. And the fact that Apollo missions just stopped with no reason, and astronauts saying somebody else is there, just makes you wonder whats really going on. So, we speculate. It may just be nothing, but it's fun to do.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 12:45 PM
link   
It sure is strange that we cannot find any more IR images of the moon apart from this one.

John Lear- do you know of any more IR images we can look at to determine if these alleged bases are there.

I am very interested in all the hot spots in most craters on the IR image. Is this just heat from rocks ?

IMO i would have thought that the craters would be cooler. I may be wrong, im not sure at this time.

Peace.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:40 PM
link   
John,

Are there any quality photos of Aristarchus before they started the Space program in the 60's? Is this when they built this facility? If so, surely there have to be some sort of pre-program photos?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Hi John,

You might have heard this one a couple of times before but I honestly think you should select a few of your mind blowing moonbase pictures. The ones no one can deny, and then try to get some interview or any other airtime on a big television network. Disclose the whole issue. There's no one else who would be more suitable to do this. Radio and internet is great to start with but without the TV network exposure 99% of the people will never know.

I love you're quest and follow every bit when it comes online.
Keep up the good work.

Regards.

[edit on 8-8-2007 by Horusnow]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Lol cmon guys,I wish this was as true as the next guy but cmon really.The shade of white just does not look right?!?! It's the damm sun reflecting our of the crater...

What could make it blue in some photos?No idea,but i surely do not see structers and roads and all the rest.If a "poeple" is smart enough to build structers on the moon why is their road so damm unstraight?i mean its really really unstraight it gos left to right almost nonstop.

Also can i get a link to the mind blowing pictures?i have seen many many pictures claiming to be this or that but in reality its just a rock.I mean if we took a picture zoomed in that far of earth we would see the image of a building or a space ship or whatever very clearly imo.So why does every picture have to be in a shadow or dark spot?

I'm not trying to be rude or a downer,but i really 100% cannot see a single thing that is ever pointed out in these pictures.Iv'e even seen one here that has clearly identified mountain peaks rising up,yet a few peaks farther back were highlighted and said to be a spacecraft......

Also why in the hell would you build it in a crater?won't the radiation just chill in the crater?I mean its ibviously blue because the radiation hitting the air as john leer said so that cant be to healthy just chilling in a bowl of radiation all day.


[edit on 8-8-2007 by Project_Silo]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Could that be lava under that crater? It does look as if its a growing volcano, maybe the moon isn't as dead as we thought.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Quasar,

In your picture you say should'nt the crater on ethe right be just as filled in?Why would that be so......Is there evidence these two collisions happend at the same time?

The mound buildt up around the two crater is the "earth" pushed up from the impact.And that tunnel .........

I say if these things are real then why reach so far,why try so hard.If it were true you could just say hey look at this building right here.Not see these divet in the moon,this divet holds a alien community.Can't you see how that one spot is darker in the divet?This is the alien shopping mall.

Again not trying to be mean but this is honestly what i see and here.





new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join