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.

 

Moon Haze, Fog, or clouds?

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 11:23 PM
link   
reply to post by The Universal Mind
 


Yes on terminator. I have no clue about that edging effect, but I suspect the behavior of low light intensity on the camera lens, perhaps even how the film responds through its processing...




posted on Jan, 21 2008 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by tep200377
Its a funny world


I second that, and you would be surprised if I told you rr is one of our chief scientists...

Would you?



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 03:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Matyas
 


Hey Matyas. Who are "we" and where does he have this title?
Sorry for the oneliner, but its a valid question to matyas post



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 05:39 AM
link   
Is there a source of coherent information, a root system under your tree of knowledge as it were, for those of you apparently quoting eg plants on the moon? I have been privileged to see enormous and I mean ENORMOUS full true colour blowups of the Moon, and yes indeed there is some interesting stuff to see, but not what you guys seem to see.

Is there a logical framework these ideas are coming off of in some way?

Not trying to be rude, I am extremely curious. There seems to be an almost cult-like acceptance of certain unproven factoids here and I would actually like to get to the bottom of where it started.



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by tep200377
reply to post by Matyas
 


Hey Matyas. Who are "we" and where does he have this title?
Sorry for the oneliner, but its a valid question to matyas post


"we", the loonies, who started looking, what has it been, 2 years now? We, who started looking at the Moon about two years ago.

And I gave him that title, believing it wiser to err on the side of caution. I have, at times, been impressed, and I am not impressionable.

And you saw that relationship with the Moon, and night, and the life cycle of plants reversing, it was a great tie in!



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Matyas
 


I allso look at the moon. And by that I mean literary look at the moon. I have a camera and take pictures of it all the time.
Here are some samples .. They are free to use for any purposes


The two firs pictures are from my kitchen window





This one I took this morning from our rooftop.
The strongest lens I have at the moment is a 300mm. So I cant get it any bigger yet.



I'm thinking of buying a telescope like one of my friends have.
He takes awsome pictures with a scope ( www.tomvictor.com... )




[edit on 22-1-2008 by tep200377]



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
reply to post by The Universal Mind
 


The upright humanoid statue stands upright behind the triangular so called spinx. looking frontal to the left of the humanoid statue is an intelligently designed angular wall. Far left on photo below the two triangular shadows is what I call the factory or processing plant. You will be able to see the cylindrical holding tanks and geometricly laid out pipelines. Rik Riley



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by tep200377
 


Beautiful shots of the Moon Tep keep them coming the last shot with the trees should be made into a postcard or used for a blown up photographic print for limited edition displayed pictures. By the way do you know the diameter size of the telescope your friend is using is it 8, 10 or 12 inches? Rik Riley



[edit on 22-1-2008 by rikriley]



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by rikriley
 


You can see his list of equipment here www.tomvictor.com...

I'll keep you posted on the moon images, but I think it would be more intresting pictures when I get a scope



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by tep200377




What can I say other than WOW !!!!
I love this picture, is that a snow gun or a plow blowing snow in the bottom right ?

I'd love to use it as my wallpaper if you have a hi-res version.



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by anxietydisorder


I feel that I might have derailed this thread .. but here goes.
The images is taken in 10MPixels. But since it was so dark I had to use very high ISO ( 1600 ). The images then get very noisy. I allso had to take two pictures. One with short exposure of the moon in detail and one the second after with longer exposure. I combine those images and sharpen the moon with the first image.


So I made a new one , that is a bit bigger ( 1024 x 768 )


The originals are here :



I'll have another go at it tomorrow morning with a tripod and longer exposure. The only tricky thing is that the moon moves 2 pixels every second. And the exposure for a low noise picture is about 10 seconds.

But hey, thats why we've got Photoshop



[edit on 22-1-2008 by tep200377]



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by DogHead
Is there a source of coherent information, a root system under your tree of knowledge as it were, for those of you apparently quoting eg plants on the moon? I have been privileged to see enormous and I mean ENORMOUS full true colour blowups of the Moon, and yes indeed there is some interesting stuff to see, but not what you guys seem to see.

Is there a logical framework these ideas are coming off of in some way?

Not trying to be rude, I am extremely curious. There seems to be an almost cult-like acceptance of certain unproven factoids here and I would actually like to get to the bottom of where it started.


Alright, line up to drink the kool-aid, women and children first.

The above line is cult-like. Me making a thread based on an image I came across, is not cult-like. I found an image with what looked to be a strange haze and thought it would be nice to share it, even if it is nothing.

Just because there is an image with strange things in it, does not mean that I accept everything that everyone has to say about it. I observe, if I find something that isn't in every other photo, I share it.

So, what are we not seeing
specifically on the moon, that you claim to have seen before? Not that I am going to take what you say, carve it in stone, then tell everyone to obey or the earth will swallow them up. I am just extremely curious, too.



posted on Jan, 22 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by tep200377
 


Those pictures are beautiful. I don't know how you make the moon look so close, what part of the world do you take the pictures from?



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by rikriley
 


Your theories... while interesting... are somewhat flawed. Sunlight only reaches one half of the moon. It is much like two people hold hands and spinning in the circle... when spinning you never see your friend's back because of the fact that the force of one person is pulling the other with it.

I won't say you're wrong about some other intelligent life form creating a crater (since you only need to be correct once) but there is a very simple explaination. The impact of an astroid hitting the moon's surface creates pressure on the areas surrounding the impact sight. When this happens the land scoops up creating a "bowl". After the dust has a chance to "settle" (if you will) the appearance of mountainous terrain is more noticeable. This is even more common when multiple craters are formed in close proximity to one another. The pressure from multiple hits would naturally cause a "bowl"...



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by The Universal Mind
 


Hey TUM!

I live in Norway. We've had some days with a nice clear moon hanging over us. Today it was snowing, and no clear sight. I use a Canon 400D and a Sigma 70 - 300 lens, a pretty cheap one to.. But it gets the job done when mounted on a tripod. I have to sharpen the moon to get the details on it.



posted on Jan, 23 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by HannahSolo
reply to post by rikriley
 


Your theories... while interesting... are somewhat flawed. Sunlight only reaches one half of the moon. It is much like two people hold hands and spinning in the circle... when spinning you never see your friend's back because of the fact that the force of one person is pulling the other with it.

I won't say you're wrong about some other intelligent life form creating a crater (since you only need to be correct once) but there is a very simple explaination. The impact of an astroid hitting the moon's surface creates pressure on the areas surrounding the impact sight. When this happens the land scoops up creating a "bowl". After the dust has a chance to "settle" (if you will) the appearance of mountainous terrain is more noticeable. This is even more common when multiple craters are formed in close proximity to one another. The pressure from multiple hits would naturally cause a "bowl"...


The far side of the Moon actually receives totally more sunlight then the near side because the eclipses are viewed only from the near side on Earth and during the eclipse the farside still receives light from the Sun. Yes both sides do not receive sunlight at the same time but in cycles. The reason so many mistake that sunlight does not shine on the farside is because they call it the Dark Side and believe it stays dark all of the time.

I do agree the near side that faces Earth tends to be brighter because with the aid of the Earth reflecting sunlight onto the Moon the light on the Moon is therefore amplified. Rik Riley

[edit on 23-1-2008 by rikriley]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join