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.

 

Astounding Moon Footage! Did NASA Want You To See This?

page: 2
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 07:02 AM
link   
Art Bell has said, there's rocks and dirt in the moon. And that's all he see's. He said the same about Mars, and he was right about that too. Dirt and rocks. that's all folks!




posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


I think the question is Do you, seriously believe that there is a 1000ft chimney stack sticking out of the surface of the moon, the smoke billows or wafts and then dissipates, i'm sorry but that amount of smoke would require gale force winds to dissipate that quickly, correct if i'm wrong but i thought the weather report for the moon was "always mild forever, no atmosphere here"

Now show me a high rez pass over of the area with this anomoly on it and i may be convinced, but for this "movie" i believe its a defect on the camera used to zoom on the original image.



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 07:27 AM
link   
When I looked at this footage I thought of John Lear's claim that there is an atmosphere on the moon. If there were no atmosphere shouldn't the smoke flow down the sides of the chiminey like a dry ice cloud under the influence of the moon's gravity? It should not float through the "air" like normal smokestack smoke.

I'm . . . I'm . . . starting to . . . weep. This means . . . snuffle, snork, urk . . . sigh, our government has . . . lied to us. Sniff.

[edit on 26-11-2007 by ipsedixit]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 07:48 AM
link   
reply to post by RancidCat
 


Ok Rancid, first off, I don't contend that it's a proven pic of a 'smoke stack' on the Moon!! Just trying to get some logical explanations. The one in the 'Bad Astronomy' site is just too simplistic. And I don't dig it! Zooming on to the enlargement would not have produced the illusion of 'movement' in this case. It would have resulted in everything on the Moon seemingly becoming enlarged at the same time. I don't see this 'blowing up' happening.

That said, you mentioned something about a smoke stack on the Moon!


I think the question is do you, seriously believe that there is a 1000ft chimney stack sticking out of the surface of the moon..


Maybe! Take a peek at this image by Apollo 16. Notice a similar structure here? Dust on the lens? Photographic glitch? Or a smoke stack?!!!


Apollo Orbital Image AS16/H/AS16-118-18957.
Courtesy: Keith Laney


Original Apollo Image

Cheers!



[edit on 26-11-2007 by mikesingh]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh
reply to post by RancidCat
This is nonsense and poppycock! Do you seriously believe this so called explanation?
[edit on 26-11-2007 by mikesingh]


This is certainly more reasonable than alien structures on the Moon!!! How is this any less "nonsense and poppycock" than the "alien stuctures on the Moon" theory?

[edit on 26-11-2007 by timelike]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


The first photo I can write off as too much chance of tampering, with all it's went through. But if the second one has a provenance that is acceptable, then it really is worth further study.

And Jedi, if you tie yourself too closely to some of these people who want to be experts, when they go over the proverbial cliff, guess what happens to you.



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 08:00 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


That one is easy, what your looking at is actually a close up image of microcraters and the "structure" is actually a golf tee the wrong way up buried in the moon dust.


Seriously, i have no idea, but let me do some research and i'll get back to you.



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Thats a sad looking earth in the background full of craters like the moon.



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by jedimiller
I've examined the footage. having taking numerous photography courses I can safely come to the conclusion that it's a dirty lens. perhaps a hair or fabric got into the developing and made it out to look that way. could also be a burn in the film, but it's a micro defect. Cameras and film get beaten up in space and function funny in space. hope this helps.


Yes, it helps. Helps me remember why I put (and keep) this guy on ignore in the first place - faulty conclusions based on faulty logic arrogantly stated like no one else needs to even bother considering further whatever the subject is.

Mike has produced post after space-related post, and almost all of them truly challenge the established (NASA) view of what is going on out there and this one is no different.

Keep it up.



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 09:31 AM
link   
Hey Mike, how'ya doin?..........heres some more pics for the thread for the sake of discussion...
I see your spire and raise ya by one spire....


I raise you one bridge (courtesy of Buzz Aldrin)...


And One cable TV antennae type thingy, I'll have to get the link later. U2U me if you need it. Its a dutch webite or something...




Originally posted by jedimiller
Art Bell has said, there's rocks and dirt in the moon. And that's all he see's. He said the same about Mars, and he was right about that too. Dirt and rocks. that's all folks!


All due respect jedimiller, but I dont think Art Bell is really on the listener side of his program. I havent listened to him in years. I know its actually George Noory now, I stopped listening when Bell retired for the 10th or 11th time...even back then - I got the impression that if you were to approach Mr Bell with any type of story, he would've just smiled in your face and called you a loon under his breath/behind your back or whatever. Can I back this up? Probaby not. But I also felt he wasnt very respectable towards most of/any of his callers unless they held some type of credibility through book deals/popularity etc. I think its funny you cited "he was right about that too". Had he gone there and we were unaware? Sorry, just being a smart-a**. Again, no disrespect. In regards to what you were taught in film/camera class or whatever class you are taking. Dont use that to base your entire theory. Use that AND look outside that. Approach the problem from both sides. It's WHAT they teach us that keeps us from looking outside the proverbial box.



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 09:44 AM
link   
I noticed the fingerprint growing in the slide show, and as has been stated, the Earth appears to grow at the same rate. I don't think this would be possible if it were real would it? It's a quarter of a million miles away.

The object in the second photo is very clear, but I would expect to see a shadow similar to the ones produced by the uneven surface. There's a bit of a dark spot on the right side, but it doesn't appear to be long enough.

Thanx Mike! Alway great stuff. . .

2PacSade-



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by timelike

I must agree with Jedimiller and Rhain, I've come across this footage before and the explanation was a camera fault, hence it follows the the camera shot.

I think the 'smoke' is some sort of internal reflection. The dirt may appear to come in and out of view depending on how it's illuminated by the sun.


Wait... You're confusing things..

Jedimiller states:


I can safely come to the conclusion that it's a dirty lens.... could also be a burn in the film...


While Rhain says:


IMO the burn or camera flaw would follow the camera shot not the moon. The dark image stays stead fast to the moon, the camera is moving over it. I don't see what lead you to your conclusion.


So you're agreeing with both opposing sides of observation.

The 'smoke' stays in orbit with the moon, it doesn't follow the camera as would a spec of dust, and it's motion matches the speed of the surrounding moon surface.

I like this one, but ultimately I'll never know if it's an amazing optical illusion, a flat out fake done by persons unknown, or the moon having a smoke break from a hard days work in the office..

I honestly don't see it as a flaw/defect in/on the camera, personally..

(edit, what does hopenstly mean.. lol)


[edit on 26/11/2007 by badw0lf]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by spikedmilk
 


Hey spiked! Long time, no see!
Thanx for those pics. Wow! I haven't seen those before except the last one.
Intriguing, to say the least. Now to look at them in detail. Let's see what comes up. I wish I had that ENVI software now, but heck, it costs the Earth, with the Moon thrown in!! $5000 plus postage! Darn.

Oh, well! Why should I bother? There's nothing on the Moon or Mars. Just dust, rocks and bad pixels!


Cheers!



[edit on 26-11-2007 by mikesingh]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


yarrrr!, is it me or was it a looong holiday weekend? ah well, more goodies for the goodie bag.....

a side view of the same spire maybe?


and another type tower (check out the shadow - looks long)


...and just for heck of it... the point of interest is in the background. could be artefacting/pixels or maybe its the remants of some broken down dome type structure? couldnt say for sure.


one of my new favorites...from Luna 17 (russian rover)...yeah its hard to look at but once you get a feel for it....







[edit on 26-11-2007 by spikedmilk]

[edit on 26-11-2007 by spikedmilk]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 11:21 AM
link   
was there really a landing on the moon



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 11:32 AM
link   
This again? Good to know nothing is too ancient to be dragged out one more time.


Originally posted by mikesingh

Just trying to get some logical explanations. The one in the 'Bad Astronomy' site is just too simplistic.


Yet it's perfectly logical. What's the problem? You don't dig it?


And I don't dig it! Zooming on to the enlargement would not have produced the illusion of 'movement' in this case.


Obviously it does because zooming-in on a still image is what this "footage" is.


It would have resulted in everything on the Moon seemingly becoming enlarged at the same time. I don't see this 'blowing up' happening.


Look at the Earth. Compare its size on the first frame of the animation to its size on the last frame.


Jeez.



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 11:34 AM
link   
If the supposed "footage" is indeed a collated sequence of stills, as there seems to be evidence to indicate, then:
(a) the title of the thread (footage) is disingenious, as we are dealing with a manufactured GIF file
(b) the defect/dust/smudge explanation works quite well as the suggested dust particle would be indeed mapping to the same area of the print

I can't believe the OP didnt' notice the way-too-fast change in the size of Earth, blowing the smoke/smokestack argument to the wind (pun intended).



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 12:07 PM
link   
Kind of OT, but not. Stumbled on this just now while searching for something else. Geo nuts should enjoy it anyway:

Moon Rocks on the Micro Level
------
Gravy

[edit on 11/26/2007 by PrplHrt]



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 01:29 PM
link   
Clearly all of you are missing the point.

The moon is a steam powered space craft piloted by Giant Pigs. When boiler pressure reaches to high a level they have to let off steam. They use Holograph producing satellites (same ones used to project the planes on 9/11) to make it look like there are camera and film "specialists" on "Earth" that can explain away the steam stack with "science".

Ever wonder why you never see Pigs and steam locomotives in the same place?

I thought you guys were smarter then this. Why do you think so many religions do not allow you to eat pork?



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by spikedmilk
 


OK, I caught you! That last image with all the colors is mislabeled.

That's "The Crowning of the Magi", a lost Picasso worth millions.




top topics



 
18
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join