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.

 

Uncensored NASA Moon Images!!

page: 12
233
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


His point is that believers talk out of both sides of their mouths. Whilst simultaneously cheering for "NASA going down" and "being proved wrong", their very evidence for this is based off images.........provided by NASA.




posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeppo
Yes we know that and i knew this would be the John Lear lovers argument to debunk my debunking.


Well what about the Dust Storms NASA tells us about? The ones that cause the sunrise and sunset rays that they call Moon Fountains?




posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by thrashee
 


Come on now, things are not so black and white.

NASA probably started with good intentions, but was eventually taken over by the shadow government, or illuminati I prefer to call them.

You can apply this rule to many "positions of power" over our known history too.

Perhaps you should read a bit more about things before putting your 'facts' out there. You seem not only angry about a lot of issues (I have seen you reply to many posts in the last few days 'debunking' everything you read. Seriously if I were you, I'd question what I'm so damn angry and pissed off about? Perhaps, your subconcious is working on you to expand your mind, yet that thing I refer to as ego (we all have this so it's not just you) is telling you to stay in your small box, and don't dare venture out into the unknown.

If you are that skeptical and that angry at every post you cannot grasp (or understand) perhaps you should find a website that caters for "debunking everything".

Love

Z



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by RegionalChaos
"The first lunar rover to arrive on the Moon was carried to the lunar surface by the USSR's unmanned probe Luna 17 in 1970.


Fantastic
At least ONE person thought to go look it up... This is what page 8?
Star for the effort... but you forgot to add that the last Lunar Orbiter was THREE YEARS earlier... but good work...



And Its true 10 ignores are not NEARLY enough



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by AntisepticSkeptic
Why didn't Gordon Cooper who also claimed to saw a UFO spaceraft landing on Earth : as fantastical claim as he was making NEVER EVER SAID of seeing
artificial structures on the moon?
WHY?


Because he signed a contract of non disclosure with NASA which he was very adamant about in the interviews... that he was NOT discussing anything to do with NASA... Roswell and UFO's on Earth, military cover up has nothing to do with NASA

He was VERY clear on that especially on Fox... did you MISS that part?

Would you like me to ask him 'off the record'?




posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by RegionalChaos
 



Uh huh....so which is the first image? I'm not disagreeing....but it's important to now know which image was made first. And, what is the time of orbit?

Answered the last question myself....average orbital time of two hours. Now, what was it's altitude at this time? What is the scale of the photo? In other words....from this information, we should be able to extrapolate a close figure for the speed of the object that allegedly made the "tracks".
[edit on 19-8-2008 by MrPenny]

[edit on 19-8-2008 by MrPenny]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:26 PM
link   
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


I was merely explaining another's position.

You seem to be on my heels now, accusing me at every turn of being angry and simply debunking everything. I have acted neither angry nor disrespectful in this forum, so I would kindly appreciate it if you get off your good vibe high horse and quit trying to speculate what lies behind my motives or psychology--you already have enough speculation of your own to concern yourself with.

Oh....

Peace!



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
The DoD has finally released some image numbers and the WORK being done is by Mark Robinson at Arizona State University (ASU) who are the ones hosting the images. One of Marks Team Members is Michael Malin from Malin Space Science Systems

lroc.sese.asu.edu...
That page is the team for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, not the team for Lunar Orbiter.

Just to avoid confusions.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by star in a jar
nobody bothered to use hairnets when scanning these images, people couldn't keep drinks away from the photo processing room... rips, tears, etc... just terrible.


As anti72 has so graciously offered my bandwidth twice to point to the info...

The negatives were processed by machine on the space craft... then scanned and transmitted to Earth

The lines on the photos are NOT joining seam lines they are scan passes of the video camera...

When the signal was sent to earth via radio... (this was before digital) they created 16 inch by 20 inch negatives from the scans... These were then in turn printed into 16 x 20 inch contact prints first...

The scans we are looking at are recent scans of these old prints and negatives that have been in storage since 1967...

Fortunately some of us have a few original copies kicking around the garage...

like this one... IV-6H2_A



But since John is no longer here... I guess I will be putting them up on my site... and that will be a while yet...



[edit on 19-8-2008 by zorgon]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Just to avoid confusions.


Yes but Mark is still the . of all the Lunar images, including Clementine... don't make me drag all that in here
I still have all the emails



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Check this out

I see a flag, and a face. What do you see?

Found this in lo5-126-h2a, upper left area.



[edit on 19-8-2008 by Ferengi]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


Do you happen to know the original file names of the images here containing the tracks?



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon
The lines on the photos are NOT joining seem lines they are scan passes of the video camera...


I'll take that as authoritative....( I know zorgon, odd..... )....and my question is back....why do the alleged "tracks" end at the horizontal line? Might they be some artifact created by the video technology? Just as the horizontal line is?



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by thrashee
 


So what are your motives?

Can you explain the oddities of the pictures shown? I haven't seen you do it once? So there must be some kind of "motive"?

Z



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


I know, but my idea was to make it clear that those people are not the ones responsible for these images.

There will come a time when we will be talking about the images from that mission, but it's too soon for that.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   
This is the page that I was thinking about, it explains how the photos were taken and processed.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
reply to post by thrashee
 


So what are your motives?

Can you explain the oddities of the pictures shown? I haven't seen you do it once? So there must be some kind of "motive"?

Z


I stated quite early on how one might reasonably explain these pictures. I also stated that if the pictures that contain what might be tracks could not have been taken whilst any rover had been on the moon, then that indeed would be curious (in other words, I agreed that those pictures were odd).

Now I'm simply waiting to verify the date the tracks picture was taken to see if it falls outside of a possible rover explanation.

Hey. Just to let you in on a little secret: I'm a skeptic. You might notice a trend in my replies: those who state that something is interesting and deserves further investigation almost never get a reply from me. Those that shout out "OMG! Now no one can deny aliens exist!", or "This proves beyond a doubt that the moon is inhabited" will get the rote explanation of how none of this evidence proves anything.

That's part of that deny ignorance part. It's a pretty typical reply from a skeptic. Are you really that amazed by this?



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by thrashee
 


Clutching at straws.

The tracks have also been discussed in this thread, perhaps you should take your own advice. Also you have yet to explain ANY of the anomalies. Perhaps you should take up a new hobby? I suggest watching TV and digesting what the main stream media feeds you. Good night.

Z



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
reply to post by thrashee
 


Clutching at straws.

The tracks have also been discussed in this thread, perhaps you should take your own advice. Also you have yet to explain ANY of the anomalies. Perhaps you should take up a new hobby? I suggest watching TV and digesting what the main stream media feeds you. Good night.

Z


I'm clutching at straws? Are you serious?

I provided explanations around post 3 or 4. Maybe you were too lazy to scroll back enough. But you're missing the point: I don't claim these things are anything other than anomalies. That's the kicker people like you never quite seem to understand.

As much as you'd love it if all the skeptics would just go away so ATS could be your personal romper room for whatever you'd like to believe in, it's an open forum for both sides.

You're a high-vibe kind of dude. I'm sure you can take it.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by thrashee]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by thrashee
 


It's amazing how people love to get all excited over the obvious!

The d formation was a total ok so what.

If they see a soda spill on the ground and it makes a curvy formation of an s I bet to some people there is some hidden meaning to it.




top topics



 
233
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join