Infrared Moon Images

Originally posted by sherpa


Excellent!..Well done Iblis, and as before no debate response noted.

Now if I can just press upon you to do the same operation one last time only this time with the Latitude=70 and the Longtitude=240, I think we will be done.

Wow.
That is interesting.
I have never seen those before.
It looks like tall towers or something that have been airbrushed out.
No matter what it is, the question is, why is it airbrushed out.
Period.
Hiding findings, albeit it photographic, is not upholding scientific ethical theory, and those engaged in that, are not scientists, but so called masters of knowledge, that they do not share with others.
Those people are to be held in disdain.

Are there more of these photos?





[edit on 11-8-2007 by weatherguru]

sherpa , thanks for your input, I didn't know those censored pictures.

Thanks also to John Lear for his comments, the whole thread is getting more and more interesting.

Let's switch back to the discussion.

Another possible explanation for Tycho:

U. S. Air Force, Cambridge Research Laboratories, Bedford, Massachusetts

Infrared images of the thermal anomaly associated with the lunar crater Tycho were obtained during the lunar night after Tycho had ceased to be illuminated by the Suin for as long as 97 hours. In agreement with results of previous studies, these measurements show that the crater is warmer than its surroundings during the lunar night, and that the temperature of the thermal anomaly gradually decreases with time, being no longer detectable after new moon. This work provides strong evidence that the steeper crater walls facing the Sun before local sunset are warmer throughout the cooling phase, and that the Tycho anomaly is thus produced by solar, rather than internal, heat.

source


I am not defending this article, just came across it when i tried to find more infrared pictures of the moon. It's strange, that the only picture is from the MSX Project in 1996 (11 years ago).

Someone posted an idea to "do it yourself", well are there telescopes let's say around 100k $ that could make images, that could prove theories etc? I am sure if we are speaking for an amount under one million dollars it could be possible? Don't laugh at me, i really don't know anything about the technique, maybe someone can put me some light on this?

The other question is - do we really want to get prove (f.e. for John Lear's theory) ? I am certain they are being secrets that are to complex for most of us "sheep's" to understand, and that's a very good reason to keep them that way.

George

Mr. Lear,

First and most important.... Thank You.

Second..

I have no ATS points, nor a history of posts. As a matter of fact I think i only have one or two beyond this one. Am not sure what the date of my ats registration states, but know that I've been reading for quite some time before that..

Mr. Lear you are a great person and I've tremendous respect for you and your thoughts.

Am posting only because I wish to point out the great disservice pushed upon everyone who is discussing or reading. In that, my meaning is, I am not here to read about someone telling me someone else is wrong. I can make that up for myself thank you, and don't need Mass Media or other Vocal blabbler to try and do it for me.

Am asking to go back to reading, and nothing more. Respect to be giving for the people providing the information to do so in a complete and coherent way, with out being stomped all over by the above mentioned people. I can't seem to think of any reason why anyone would care if someone disagrees. Who cares..? It is the incorrect item to focus on, distraction... Again, why would someone feel it is necessary to think for me? Is that some new right am not aware of? If a counter opinion is shown, or clear proof of what is being stated is incorrect.. Then provide it.. But to hound and hassle, and act like court room circus dogs waiting for scraps of any slipped up verbiage to then twist, spin, and spew out in negative babbler is worthless, completely!

The item to care about is the actual information, and that I am thankful for. On topic for this Forum, Nasa also has a history of acting like should think for me, heck they have 20 some odd years of demonstrating that. I find it extremely funny, except for when I think about taxes...

Seems there are many other places that feel they are entitled to the same Rights.. Why?

In case there is confusion in what I am saying above, lets make it clear. If you can show proof positive information is incorrect, do so. If you have nothing to provide to the discussion, other then to Think For Me.. Shut Up.

I do take offense though, when having to be subject to..
"---Best wishes to everyone else, who isn't under some sort of mental dementia. "

Having the ability to think for myself and not wishing someone else to do it for me is not called "some sort of mental dementia". I stopped calling people names in second grade and thought everyone else did too..

Good day to all, and a gracious thanks to those that know it.. =)

[edit on 11-8-2007 by Lunchman]

[edit on 11-8-2007 by Lunchman]

Mr. Lear,

Thanks so much for the great thought provoking posts. Just one question, you are stating all images of the moon taken (by Hubble and Clementine) after 1970 should not be viewed as unaltered?

Could you direct me to where you have contrasted some images, and shown the deception alleged?

Wow, hours this has fascinated me.

Originally posted by absente


well are there telescopes let's say around 100k $ that could make images, that could prove theories etc? I am sure if we are speaking for an amount under one million dollars it could be possible? Don't laugh at me, i really don't know anything about the technique, maybe someone can put me some light on this?

you don't need that much money. For the less than the average price of a new car, you can get a VERY powerful telescope, able to see galaxies and such that would make you drool ... that actually has several other powerful telescopes on it just to aim the thing!

But, even for a thousand dollars, a 12-16" scope would be awfully powerful, enough to see the the division of the rings around Saturn ... and they do sell attachments for photo taking.

I don't know the exact size and aperture needed to get the necessary resolution on the moon (to see something the size of buildings/equipment), and how steady your hand would have to be at moving the controls slow enough ... but I am sure you could manage.

If you really wanted to go all out, you could work out a rig to mount two of the 'scopes, and learn how to focus them on the same spot ... your own binocular telescope. If you take images ... a program like gimp 2.2 can create a 3D image out of them if you enter the appropriate information.

Those observatories are great, but the layman does have some chance at viewing some spectacular things. Finding a clear night sky, and far enough from city lights is a bit hard ... but not impossible.


It is funny how people come to John Lear's form, just so they can yell at him.

That takes some gall to go into someone's backyard, then tell them how they should garden and if they disagree, go to all the neighbors and say they are silly, they planted pumpkins, watermelons are the obvious choice! If you agree with pumpkins; you are all full of nonsense and need your head checked!

people sometimes amuse me ... learn to be civil and state disputing facts, or go somewhere else ... don't become a troll, trolls are stinky and not too bright, they are just big bullies.

FreeThinkerIdealist , thanks for that explanation. That sounds good, I researched a little bit and found good telescope for around 5000 - 7000 USD with GPS, GOTO computer maneuvering etc.

For example:

CGE-1400 Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope

Meade 10" LX200 R UHTC Advanced Ritchey Chretien RC GoTo GPS Telescope


But the question stays, can we make useful shots of objects on the moon with that telescope? Useful - meaning for example proving any abnormal activity on the moon, look at previously censored by the NASA spots - etc ? Maybe John can answer to that question? Or of course everyone else that is informed

edit: second link

[edit on 12/8/07 by absente]

hmm wat about the spots that are almost white dont they indicate heat or electronincs in infrared?

Originally posted by absente

But the question stays, can we make useful shots of objects on the moon with that telescope? Useful - meaning for example proving any abnormal activity on the moon, look at previously censored by the NASA spots - etc ? Maybe John can answer to that question? Or of course everyone else that is informed

[edit on 12/8/07 by absente]

Pop along to Google and do a search for Telescopes and telescope photography and you will soon see what can be done with many telesopes.

However I doubt you would be able to afford anything that is going to take fine detailed shots.

Just accept the fact that the majority of evidence points to the fact that the moon is a relatively dead moon with no mines or habitation of any kind

Hi weatherguru,

In response to you question here is a couple of others, one of which I neglected to make a note of the cordinates for..tch tch sloppy !





























[edit on 12-8-2007 by sherpa]

Originally posted by absente

Maybe John can answer to that question? Or of course everyone else that is informed

I have a Celestron 8" cassegrain with a binocular eyepiece which I would highly recommend for anybody wanted to to any extensive viewing of the moon, stars and planets. The advantage of the binocular eyepiece is that you use both eyes and it relieves the annoying eyestrain of just using one eye to view.

With a binocular eyepiece you can set the telescope on an equatorial mount (tracks the moon and stars automatically) get yourself and easy chair and watch the view nonstop for hours.

I haven't used mine since last year when Mike sent the pictures of Aristarchus and I realized that I was wasting my time trying to find anything serious with an 8".

Mike used a 10" and got some great shots. I would like to rent or get somebody to take some photos with a 16" or larger of some specific areas of the moon which would include:

Aristarchus
Endymion
Mare Crisium (preferably between 3 or 4 days old)
Petavius B
Mosting A

for starters.

There is some kind of secret or unpublished or unspoken agreement between NASA and other agencies with those institutes that have larger telescopes which preclude the use of the telescope to take pictures of the moon. I don't know exactly how it works except it is impossible to get viewing/camera time if you are going to photograph the moon. And of course it is not as simple as just saying you are going to photograph something else and then swing the scope over. It doesn't work like that.

At this point in my life my best bet would probably be to wait until I get there. :

Originally posted by Chorlton

Just accept the fact that the majority of evidence points to the fact that the moon is a relatively dead moon with no mines or habitation of any kind

Many agree with you Chorlton, however you should realize how difficult it is for many of us to take seriously any comments from someone who uses Mr. Potatohead for any avatar.

Hey Sherpa, would you happen to know what the possible scale is on those two pics you posted are? I have seen those photos before and I have always wondered what the size of the objects being blurred out are.

In the first photo, do you think we are looking at a "shack" sitting on the ridge of a 40 foot crater, or is the blurred object an entire city sitting on the edge of a 40 mile long crater? These are 2 extremes, the right scale must be in the middle somewhere?

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by Chorlton


Many agree with you Chorlton, however you should realize how difficult it is for many of us to take seriously any comments from someone who uses Mr. Potatohead for any avatar.

Your knowledge of classic UK Childrens comedy shows is startling.
Then again why doesnt that surprise me?

Originally posted by IronDogg
Hey Sherpa, would you happen to know what the possible scale is on those two pics you posted are? I have seen those photos before and I have always wondered what the size of the objects being blurred out are.

In the first photo, do you think we are looking at a "shack" sitting on the ridge of a 40 foot crater, or is the blurred object an entire city sitting on the edge of a 40 mile long crater? These are 2 extremes, the right scale must be in the middle somewhere?

Hi IronDogg,

The scale is 1 pixel=1 kilometer.

Now if you can work that one out than your a better man then I, (which isn't really a hard thing to be), the top image co-ordinates are -70 137 so if there was a significant feature around there somewhere you could probably scale it better as significant features tend to have published dimensions.

Perhaps someone could take up the challenge and tell us, I for one would be curious.

Originally posted by Chorlton

Your knowledge of classic UK Childrens comedy shows is startling.
Then again why doesnt that surprise me?

WOW! I am impressed Chorlton. Does the....errr....Royal Mr. Potatohead have a name?

Originally posted by johnlear

Mike used a 10" and got some great shots. I would like to rent or get somebody to take some photos with a 16" or larger of some specific areas of the moon which would include:

John, this is exactly why I am asking. I want to buy something really professional an after that, working with ATS and make pictures of interesting areas, including those you speak about and posting them or help other organizations.

I have a great place on a mountain 15km from Sofia, where I can deploy the telescope and have a very good view. Further, i will attach it to a laptop and a good digital camera - the idea is to catch one specific area of interest over several weeks and months, in order to find any activity. I have already an astronom from my organization, who is willing to participate and help.

If you can provide me with specific information, what i have to buy (exactly), we can make it happen. My budged for this year is 10.000$ , if we got any success we can invest more next year. I am willing to make this, because I believe you, among other people sharing similar story's about the moon.

Greetings from Bulgaria,

George

Originally posted by Chorlton
Just accept the fact that the majority of evidence points to the fact that the moon is a relatively dead moon with no mines or habitation of any kind

Yes, you are right, when we talk about official evidence, however not so many hundred years ago, they were saying that the world isn't round, but they were wrong.

Real science is questioning facts about known things --

John, I think they call that character in the Avatar "Sir. Potatohead".

I just had one quick question for John. But first, a story. I used to be a paramedic here in NYC, and I remember this one patient of mine, we were on our way to a psych center when the patient began telling me how he wants to go to these facilities and plays crazy on purpose. I told him why?

He said, because He was better off, he said that unless he leaves this planet, he will continue to act crazy as long as humans remain trapped here on earth. "we should be flying through the stars" he told me. He said that no one here will allow him to live on the moon, and he told me how there is a civilization of 300,000 people there. I was much more ignorant back then, and I only listened to him. I probably thought he was crazy. Poor guy.

John Lear, do you foresee a time when investors can invest in Lunar resources? land? Can the common middle class person have oppurtunities to invest? When will Zero Point Energy go public?

[edit on 8/12/2007 by StreetCorner Philosopher]

Originally posted by StreetCorner Philosopher

John, I think they call that character in the Avatar "Sir. Potatohead".

That has to be the best laugh of the month.

John Lear, do you foresee a time when investors can invest in Lunar resources? land? Can the common middle class person have oppurtunities to invest?

I respectfully decline to make any prediction about lunar resource and realty investments on the basis that I have no idea what the heck the 'big picture' is. (Note to Sleeper: not THE big picture...the big picture.)

When will Zero Point Energy go public?

I will say this about Zero Point energy. It is a scam. It was always a scam. It will always be a scam. And I believe it is a scam. And you can quote me on that.

Originally posted by absente

If you can provide me with specific information, what i have to buy (exactly), we can make it happen. My budged for this year is 10.000$ , if we got any success we can invest more next year. I am willing to make this, because I believe you, among other people sharing similar story's about the moon.

Greetings from Bulgaria,

George

Greetings back George. I will get a detailed list for you. I have a friend who sold his 16" about a year ago and he knows all the specifics and prices.