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: 8
233
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Here is some info about the Russian rover, Lunokhod. It states the place it landed and how far it traveled.

"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. Luna 17 landed at Mare Imbrium and sent out the instrumented robot Lunokhod 1 lunar rover vehicle to get soil samples and analyze density and composition. Lunokhod broadcast TV over its 2.5 mile range and observed stars with an X-ray telescope"

Taken from here: www.spacetoday.org...




posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


After all John Lear wasn't that wrong, was he?

Great post Mike. Stared and flagged !!!



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by RegionalChaos
Here is some info about the Russian rover, Lunokhod. It states the place it landed and how far it traveled.

"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. Luna 17 landed at Mare Imbrium and sent out the instrumented robot Lunokhod 1 lunar rover vehicle to get soil samples and analyze density and composition. Lunokhod broadcast TV over its 2.5 mile range and observed stars with an X-ray telescope"

Taken from here: www.spacetoday.org...


Thats what I was saying, these moon pictures are from 66'-67, there were no rovers on the moon before that, were there?



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Nice pictures for the tech that took them and happy hunting for the buildings and towers

the whole NASA thing just makes me laff if you dont trust them at all dont trust anything they put out because they never will give you a clean untouched image

the only way your going to get that is if you stump up the cash to send your own probe up there.
word of warning anyone that tends to trust nasa with any form of probe or rover normaly find out that something goes horribly wrong and it smashes in to the surface of the planet it is supposed to look at (BEAGLE 2 god rest your soul
)

if the US and any other "superpower" has put weapons up there your never gonna get a look at it "National Security" that why when you get shots/video of the space shuttle you never get a good look around coz ther some big ass Missile platforms up there from 60 years of Cold Weaponisation and then you have the ones that are "communication" satalites

believe whatever you want boys & girls (must be PC lol)
FREE WILL for the win !!!!



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   
The "spires" are obviously shadow effects though ...



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:23 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   
The location of Mare Imbrium is 32.8 degrees N and 15.6 degrees W.

See Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...

I can not find any images in the collection that have similar coordinates. A few in the third set ("V") have coordinates up near 24 degrees N. Most all the first sets stay withing +/- 4 degrees N. I do not know which image the tracks are seen in, so I am not sure what the location of those tracks said to be at.

However based on the above info, they might not be from the Russian Rover...



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


I was just downloading all the images when the site went down
.....

Does anyone have all the HiRes images? Can you send them to me or post them someplace where I can download them?

thanks,

-Euclid



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Malynn
 


I was using the reference that had been used in the post previous to mine. Had the original posters used "crater", I too would have. As it is, they referred to this as a "dome", hence my first reference to this anomaly is put in quotations marks: "dome" - rather than plainly refer to is as: dome.

Dome or Crater, the point I made still stands.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by euclid
 


The site is working, no problems here.

Could it be a ISP problem?



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


It just so happens i was watching the Universe on Sunday night, a great program on NG. Anyway they was explaining how Pluto's weird landscape (which i would like to add included strange structures like these) was created, mostly by meteor/comet strikes. Now if you want to argue with well respected scientists be my guest but i would listen to them over you or anyone else on this board for that matter, anyday.

Secondly, how did i insult John Lear? I don't know the guy but i know he lives iin a dream world! John Lear asks for what he gets. If he was not the discredited farce he is i would keep my mouth shut but people with such spectacular claims need to back this up with spectacular evidence for which i have seen none from him or in this thread, sorry to burst your bubble.

Thanks


[edit on 19-8-2008 by skeppo]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


The tower is in image lo5-125-h2a. It's to the lower left of the middle, it can be tricky to spot as it's pretty small.

On another note I would strongly appeal to believers and skeptics alike to stay on topic and refrain from personal insults. I see that the mods have already removed a number of Skeppo's posts already...



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   
What image are the tracks in?

I'd like to figure out the coordinates of them.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:50 PM
link   
reply to post by MrVertigo
 


Thanks!


As Mikesingh forgot to identify the images (it's becoming an habit... ) it is difficult to find things.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
What got me was that he changed the names.. The other images have the correct names that match up on the site, but the images in the first post are just named mikesingh13 or something...



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Are those pools of something on the moon or what?

ser.sese.asu.edu...



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by skeppo
 



the programme you watch with these scientists was a disussion about a theory on how these structures could of been made

the same as its a theory thay are made by something else

regardless of education or position its just theory nothing more

alot of so called science is theory not practical proof that us skeptics so love to demand yet quote science to dbunk other theories but history dictates Science has been wrong just as many times as some of the wild claims that get made on this site

dont get me wrong i think some people want things to be just a little to much and it clouds their judgment but also some people want to debunk to much and it clouds theirs

im not here to fight with anyone just absorbe alot of peolples points of veiw and put my own forward and like many others here

again i will say myself i think the pictures are intresting and so are peoples differing points of view on them

FREE WILL For the WIN !!!



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthTellist
 



So just because some tapes are missing it is a cover up huh. Oh ok. Well NASA must be covering up billions of lost things every day.

Before you scream anything as a fact, you might want to come up with some proof of what you're saying.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by grayshot
 


How do those photos DEFINITELY PROVE there are structures on the moon? Please explain how this is proof!



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by skeppo
 


Pluto is mostly made of ice and rock. Ice is a highly malleable substance especially when it's struck by something that carries an extremely high temperature. I can very much see odd formations being crated on a body such as Pluto. Not so much on the moon.

It's funny that people trust scientist's opinions when it come to things such as these, but when scientists and college professors step up and question 9-11, the story changes and all of a sudden magazine publishers such as Popular Science become the authority.



new topics




 
233
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join