It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NASA exposed - Do NOT miss these videos!

page: 11
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in


posted on May, 31 2008 @ 02:32 PM
Since it seems the counter argument to the faceless astronaut is being ignored... So... I will beat an already dead horse.

Solid outlines are the helmet, with earpiece and microphone outlined.

the white line is a rough outline of the face.

The problem here is that you have a black surface underglass (aka a mirror) reflecting the light off of the white of the shuttle causing distortion on the glass of the visor where the black of the snoopy mask is.

Now can we please move on to the less obvious stuff... Like the theory just put forth on the pyramid?

If not you've definitely lost a fan... You should never be so stuck in your own viewpoints that explicit evidence is ignored.


posted on May, 31 2008 @ 03:04 PM
Here we go again

I think I've finally lost interest in this nonsense and these YouTube travesties.

Everything in the first video can be torn apart and nobody who is being intellectually honest will accept any of it.

The pyramid shape in the worthless frame is just that - a pyramid in a worthless frame.

Rotating a concave surface to make it look like a convex surface is Junior High level trickery and its hard for me to believe that the author, and yes I know your on this thread, could hold a straight face while putting it in the footage.

The missing Astronaut? The neck is visible, so why all the other hype about the other details. More childish nonsense.

The green thing? These images are scans of the originals. The originals have a far higher range of colors and dynamic range due to being taken with film. The now, long obsolete scanners used to archive this stuff, could not deal with the colors properly in such a dark area of the rock and it may well be an imperfection in the original film. Assuming it is a plant of some sort is more childish nonsense. It is evidence that whatever originals are left should be run through a modern scanner. They are probably far too degraded for that by now though.

As time goes by I'm sure every bit of these tapes will turn out to be nothing. Why are so many, so gullible?

If your sold on this stuff, at least do yourself the service of investigating fully before you decide to take it all in; hook line and sinker
As P.T. Barnum once said, "Nobody ever lost a dime underestimating the intelligence of the American Public".

It is also a shame that people don't have to prove they understand graphics software and know how to use it before they can buy it. I'm starting to think that people actually believe the new pixels they create with filtering are actually in the original images they are bastardizing. It's either that or they are just lying. Has to be one or the other.

In the past I've taken the time to try and educate and posted links or examples to do that, but I don't have the heart for it at the moment. Wanting something to be true and it actually being true are not the same thing. I'm also convinced a couple of regulars here who know what is fake, have financial interests in keeping myths going.

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 03:04 PM
reply to post by ziggystar60

I believe he was referring to the infamous UFO in the crater videos/photos.. Supposedly taken by a secret apollo mission.

There are supposedly even close-up flyby videos of this but it looks completely fake..


posted on May, 31 2008 @ 03:13 PM
A quick question, and excuse me if there are already threads about this, but there seems to be a lot of stuff on how NASAs many mission have been faked, or images with UFOs or other anomolies etc in them, but is there anything similar or any of the Russian space missions? I mean if NASA astronauts are constantly being buzzed by UFOs etc, surely the Russians must've been too, and they were the first in space so had to have experienced it first right?

Are there any threads on this?

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 03:16 PM

Originally posted by Electro38
You know, America's greatest rival at the time, the USSR was competing with us ferociously. They were monitoring everything we did, and we were watching them too.

Wouldn't they have had something to say about this monumental hoax?

Why did the USSR not protest or reveal the hoax. Instead it become known by them and verified that we were on the moon.

Were our cold war enemies also part of our conspiracy? (Not to mention the other countries of the world who had the technology to monitor what we were doing and confirm it.)

Apparently, around the time of the so called lunar landings, a massive percentage of USSR citizens were starving and the US GAVE them a huge amount of their own food mountains to keep them quiet! I cant remember where i heard that but i know i did.

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 03:17 PM

Originally posted by ArMaP
As I said before, I think that the "pyramid" is just part of some equipment.

This the sequence of photos of which that "pyramid" photo is part.






I think the "pyramid" is that darker area of the rover (I think it's the rover). In the next available photo, as17-135-20682 (there is no as17-135-20681, I wonder why...) we can see a dark triangle on the top left corner of the photo, and I think that is also the "pyramid".


The green thing on the rock photo is more visible on the image available on The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth, a crop of which you can see below, after I had altered the light levels (with a little loss of data, 2503 colours instead of the original 2535).

As I said before, it does not look like something on the rock.

This why I love ATS, great work on these images, and great work Shakesbeer too. Whenever you look at something, you have to see if there can be another possibility, and both of these posts show that. Luna shows one possibility, and these show another, so were still looking for that conclusive proof I think.

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 03:29 PM
Everyone's drawing lines on faces, ranting about pyramids, and image analyzing to the point where everything can be explained another way. That was coming as that is the way of ATS.

So can someone please help me out from my post on page 6 please? I know I'm not an expert on any of this:

I'd be interested in hearing anyone's thoughts on two things:

1. Does anyone have anything to say about the first two patches that were thrown out? It does seem like he did those on purpose knowing the result in advance.

2. Is there any speculation on the "music" that was heard? Regardless if he said Frank or thing (and I sit on the fence on that one), there is no doubt that the transmission was obviously spliced off.

I ask these two questions as I believe they are greatly related.

EDIT: The only reason I've heard about the music thus far is a metaphorical explanation which is possible but at best is opinion (I know, that's what I asked for).

[edit on 31-5-2008 by Universal Light]

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 03:45 PM
Great posting

I do like the theory that Apollo went to the moon but had some "stock" film to show in cae of any emergencies e.g. finding something, cameras not powerful enough to transmit back. protect what they find - it makes a lot of sense and proves the conspiirancy of the films with the people saying it actually happened.

I am still a fan but do feel that there was nothing there on the moon - otherwise they would throw everything at sending rockets, unmanned spacecraft etc. at the moon - err like they are doing with Mars

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 03:57 PM
reply to post by ArMaP

its even on all sides....and theres no way it can be equipment.

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 04:06 PM
reply to post by Universal Light

The pyramid in the that one exposure doesn't really say much without corroborating images and the out of focus & over exposed theory looks very viable.

To me it looks like there is a guy in the suit looking left too, but as pointed out, the reflection in the visor makes it hard to see. That is what I was trying to filter out in my images and not pollute the outlines with interpretation just tracing hard lines that even photoshop's magnetic tool should be able to see, as I'm sure I could make an image that made it look like a roll of duct tape is working on the station too if I add enough lines.

But the music transcript is very intriguing if it is real. What could that be? I don't know ET's doing some kind of application with resonant harmonics? Their instruments happened to pick up on station 111.22 K-universe-the Wave, the latest in etheric, easy listening, and adult contemporary music -shrugs-

oh and ty Alethia

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 04:12 PM

Originally posted by ArMaP

As I said before, it does not look like something on the rock.

Nice grass ArMaP

Any investigation is good, as long as it is not blinded by the idea of proving just one opinion while disregarding all the other possibilities, and I think that this is the case with the video I saw.

But is that not what you do? diligently work like you have a mission to show YOUR side of the issue?

[edit on 31-5-2008 by zorgon]

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 04:17 PM
the pyramid on the moon thing was interesting enough, it has my friend convinced that the moon is niburu (i still am skeptic about that whole deal) the images of what appears to be stonehedge has me wondering though. on nation geographic tomorrow at 9 pm est. they are showing something about a team of archeologist digging up around some stonehedge and finding some lost city or something. I plan on watchin it, i'll let you guys know what happens

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 04:42 PM
Sorry to hijack the thread, but as it is relevant, I´d really like to know what some of you (especially Internos and Zorgon) think of this find:

I know it was out on a while back (here:, but I haven´t seen it get the attention it might deserve. I mean, how can you explain this away? It´s far too big to be just lens-dust or scratches on the negative.

It´s from the Apollo 17 (Taurus Littrow Valley), and as far as I know the contrast is the only thing that´s adjusted. The original in hi-res can be found here:

Would love to hear your take on this guys, and sorry if it´s been discussed to death before, I tried but couldn´t find it

[edit on 31-5-2008 by exo.psych]

[edit on 31-5-2008 by exo.psych]

[edit on 31-5-2008 by exo.psych]

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 05:37 PM
ok last but not least..

listen to the's just as important as the video imo.

take care

[edit on 31-5-2008 by Skipper1975]

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:10 PM
reply to post by Shakesbeer

Thanks but I explained myself incorrectly. I meant the two patches that were designed for the emblem for one of the Apollo missions. There was one with a Stonehengesque drawing on it. The other looked like a spiral galaxy over the moon. They both got scraped for a patch with an eagle and Earth on it I believe. I'm curious as to why the first two patches?

Thanks for the musical thoughts.....other than those two, everything seems to have a counter-explanation.

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:36 PM

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by ArMaP
Any investigation is good, as long as it is not blinded by the idea of proving just one opinion while disregarding all the other possibilities, and I think that this is the case with the video I saw.

But is that not what you do? diligently work like you have a mission to show YOUR side of the issue?
Well, I try not to be biased.

When I present "my side" of any issue I try not to say things like "this is what I see so the other people are wrong/lying", I try to make it clear that it is only my opinion and I never disregard other opinions, I even consider the possibility that vze2xjjk may be correct (but don't tell him that).

I posted the image of the "grass" even knowing that some people would be more convinced that this was really some plant on the Moon because I would like that people think for themselves but I would also like that people think in a more "broad" way, not limiting their ideas to what they think is correct and for that the more available data the better.

But when people insist in showing those images from the old Clementine browser as if it was proof of anything when we have access to the real images then I have an objective thing to point, there are images available, so they should use them instead of using software that is obsolete for more than one year.

You will have an example that shows that I try not be biased in a U2U that I was thinking of sending you and that I will send after this post.

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:39 PM
i find it hard to believe nasa would simply leave out the face surely they wouldn't just forget to add it in you can see his nose anyway in one picture.

the rest of the videos are very nteresting though, the moon music is very eerie

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:47 PM
reply to post by CommanderSinclair

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by "even in all sides".

All I can see is two sides of a triangle, the right side less well defined than the left. The bottom of the triangle is common to the whole bottom of the photo.

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 06:57 PM
reply to post by Odessy

The Russians did go to the moon; The unmanned Luna 9 successfully landed on 3 February 1966. Apart from this, the Russian lunar programs were plagued by failures and eventually canceled due to repeated losses.

And it took pictures:

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 07:04 PM
I've read this thread and watched all the videos. At first, I was intrigued, because I too am convinced our government is covering up the existence of alien life and technology. I look for evidence everywhere... I want the smoking gun, the disclosure, the whole deal...

But then, like with so many other great ATS threads, the resourceful and intelligence of so many here provided reasonable explanations that pretty much debunk this whole thing. Sorry, conversations about music in space prove absolutely nothing, even if they are astronauts. In the thread on Bad Astronomy (website), that too was given a reasonable and plausible explanation.

The "pyramid" is no such thing, so much of these videos is decades old evidence being manipulated by modern technology into something it is not. It's all very slick and convincing, but it doesn't stand up for very long.

Discolsure will never come on YouTube. Proof needs to be dramatic, concrete and more than these videos can possibly provide. I don't buy any of it, not even the green plant... but I WANT to, because I want to know the truth.

All of the wanting in the world won't make flimsy evidence like these videos any more convincing...

new topics

top topics

<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in