Luna structures taken out of Apollo photo's ?

Originally posted by mikesingh

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by mikesingh

 

those spikes or spires look very suspicious to me. they almost appear to be upright ?

They are! The photo has been taken 240 km above the surface. It is an oblique photograph taken with an angle of 81 degrees.

and what the heck is that shape i see, i have outlined it best i can, but you can easily see there is something that looks like a structure !

Yeah! Those sure do look like structures. I don't have the time now but I'll haul it over a few filters to enhance the image. You'll be surprised what you'll find there!

Cheers!

[edit on 19-5-2009 by mikesingh]

Whats the area of the moon and the resolution of the picture if you know ? we all know the contrast is SH1*

I feel that I'm getting more and more swayed by these pictures, especially the spires and relections in the astronauts' helmets.

But what I'd like to know from you lovely people, is whether you think they are evidence of a contemporary moonbase, human, or EBE, OR that these are ancient ruins left behind by a former Luna-inhabiting race? (a la Terra Papers).

Obviously, one would be just as exciting as the other. On one hand we have an actual alien prescence on the moon, a short ride from earth, able to come down and visit Earth as and when. But on the other hand, we'd have evidence not only of extraterrestrials, but of beings which inhabited the solar system long before homo sapiens walked the Earth, and who may have aided the evolutionary process.

I think this topic needs to be taken a lot more seriously than it has been!

Peace all!

reply to post by mikesingh


Actually I dont need kiss asses as much as you seem to and have OH mike your great you really are

I am just off to have a good look through the livingmoon pics at all the join the dot /coloured in pictures of the bridges tanks spires and all the other so called structures will be back with some pics and comments asap.

I saw a documentry at the weekend on the history channel
Hoagland was on it he spoke about the HUGE crystal domes etc he believed were on the moon at one time and gave a theory as to what happend to them funny thing is dont seem to be many HUGE CHUNKS of glass or crystal lying about!

[edit on 19-5-2009 by wmd_2008]

As Of Right This Moment

The personal sniping and assorted other stupidity stops right now...

If you can not discuss the issue without bringing personalities into it, this thread will be closed pending staff review.

Your cooperation is expected.

Originally posted by mikesingh
reply to post by Agent Venom

 

I’m not surprised at your ignorance of the light/shadow effects as seen in aerial photographs. I don’t blame you as you obviously lack experience in recognition of landmarks seen in images taken from high altitude. Fortunately, I have 30 long years of experience in air photo recognition for identification of targets for close air support. What’s your experience?

You are plainly obfuscating and skirting the issue pertaining to the two photographs I have posted that apparently show structures. Note that I have said ‘apparent’ as neither I nor anyone else knows the effects of the Moon’s atmospheric conditions that produce shadows there.

Having said that, let me tell you this in lay man's language. You may be aware that anything that produces a shadow must have the opposite side reflecting light. In other words, one side of an object is bright whilst the other side is dark, merging with its shadow. Now, the images you have posted (that I’ve seen a hundred times before), clearly have a very bright side that faces the sun, the opposite side being dark that merges with the shadow.

Now have a look at the two images I posted that I’ll reproduce for your benefit. But before that, the first is your image. Check out the bright surface that reflects sunlight. The opposite side is dark and merges with its shadow. But there is NO bright reflecting surface in the two photographs I have posted below. Compare the two.

Your image....

My images....




Notice the difference? It's as clear as day. In fact, in the last photograph, the sun is toward the left, shadows are toward the right as it should be. And the 'spire' has a shadow toward the right like the other structures!

So now do you notice the difference? Don’t just shoot from the hip, though it was a nice try!

Cheers!

Sorry, Mikesingh, but you are very wrong here. And therefore, your calling to others as beeing "ignorants" is wrong, too. Please pay attention...Thanks.

You tell us, i'll repeat, that in the image of those 2 "spires", the mistery and difference is that is lacking the bright side of the "cliff" casting the shadow, in contrast with the image posted by Agent Venom which shows very clearly the bright and dark side of the cliffs which cast shadows.

But, no, your "spires" indeed have a bright side! it is almost..obviously if you look closely, no matter how low quality are the images.

Look at this, and notice the brightest zones, in the middle of the red circles. Those are just cliffs, or spikes on the lunar terrain, which just cast those long shadows.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/63bf174bf412.gif[/atsimg]

If yet not sure, you can use eyedropper tool to measure the brightness of different zones..and you will find that those cliffs are zones with highest brightness on the photo, which means that they are getting more sun light on them, which is exactly what you denied in your quoted post.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0796738e6ee9.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/db2c3a788cfe.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/cc3759557737.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/7d118735d63d.jpg[/atsimg]


Cheers!




[edit on 19/5/09 by depthoffield]

Hey zorgon CAT got your tounge re APOD NO REPLY FROM YOU
whats up!

Also mike dont bother looking on the moon or MARS FOR FACES



MOON SPIRE LANDS ON EARTH!

www.flickr.com...

more straight edges right angles cant be natural then

www.flickr.com...

Mike look here

www.flickr.com...

Plenty of faces here for you to look at all natural no ET involved
search for face in mountain forget Mars get your faces on earth!

See how easy it is!

[edit on 20-5-2009 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 20-5-2009 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 20-5-2009 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 20-5-2009 by wmd_2008]

[edit on 20-5-2009 by wmd_2008]

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Re the APOD Stars and Solstice Sun

The human eye can see a greater contrast range than a digital/film camera so if no atmosphere to scatter the light that may well be the view you would see but if a camera digital/film was set to the correct exposure for the SUN/Moon or Astronaut on the Moon or in space the stars would not show.

So it is your contention that Astronauts are not human and do not have eyes like we do, nor see like we do? Seeing as they said they do not recall seeing any stars?

And since the question was posed by a famous astronomer, Sir Patrick Moore (who incidentally was head of the BBC coverage of the mission and THOSE tapes are also lost along with NASA's tape), does it not seem logical to have an astronaut on one of the next missions simply point up away from the sun and do a 15 sec exposure?


But they didn't... because they couldn't


I mean the ISS crew can do it...

ISS006-E-51915
Low-resolution Browse Image
Stars and Airglow from ISS

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e74a7d4af94e.jpg[/atsimg]

You can also see stars in this image from ISS showing the Aurora

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4040f5d9015e.jpg[/atsimg]

PS

Responding to you may not be as high on my agenda as you wish it to be...



[edit on 20-5-2009 by zorgon]

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Also mike dont bother looking on the moon or MARS FOR FACES

Plenty of faces here for you to look at all natural no ET involved
search for face in mountain forget Mars get your faces on earth!

See how easy it is!

Easy? Darn! I wish it were!

Ok thanks for those nice li'l pics of stones etc, but wmd, tell me are you propounding that the surface geology on Earth which has produced these terrain configurations here is the same as the geology of Mars and the Moon to have produced them there? Are you trying to equate them? The same processes that produces sedimentary, volcanic, plutonic, and metamorphic rocks?

As you are surely aware, terrain is produced by Geological processes that include migration of tectonic plates, faulting and folding by volcanic eruptions, erosion processes that include water and wind erosion, and weathering processes that cause land to be worn away to lower elevations.

Now do you suggest that these processes on Earth are common on the Moon and Mars as well? If not, how can you even begin to compare the surface terrain on Earth with that of the Moon and Mars by showing nice little pics of rock formations here and asking us to compare them with those on the Moon/Mars?

Cheers!

reply to post by zorgon


RE this link

apod.nasa.gov...

You said NASA contradicted its self by saying this picure would show how we would see stars in the daytime with NO atmosphere to scatter the sunlight.
You said that how can that be if no stars show up in photos taken on the moon.SIMPLE, like I said it says how YOU would see the sky not cameras.The human eye can see a greater contrast range, if a camera was set to take pictures of the stars
seen from the moon everthing else would be over exposed, if set correctly for the Astronauts and MOON surface then stars under-exposed so they dont show.You can try this on a bright sunny day take a picture of something sunlit with an area next to it in shadow your eyes will still make out detail in the shadow area but if the camera exposes for the sunlit part shadow detail
is lost ,if it exposes for the shadow area the other area losses detail due to overexposure.
So if the earth was like that pic above and you took a picture correctly exposed to show your surroundings the stars would STILL not show up.
In one or 2 moon shots what looks like stars are seen in the background but not hundreds, as for the Astronauts as the were surrounded by the bright sunlit moon surface their pupils would have closed down to suit the light conditions if they look up in a nice dark patch for a few seconds to let their eyes adjust they would have seen them.When on the Moon they had other thihgs to do than stargaze!

As for no comments from Astronauts re stars

Even if the astronauts had made some casual observations, there would be nothing remarkable to report,
with the notable exception of their "twinklelessness". (Mike Collins does mention this in his book, "Carrying The Fire")

[edit on 20-5-2009 by wmd_2008]

reply to post by depthoffield


Hi depthoffield! Though I appreciate the effort you have taken, I suspect you haven't read my entire post in detail before responding.

Now, you have marked what you contend is a rock that is casting that long shadow. But have you analyzed the image in detail? Because if you had, you would have realized that the direction of light is from the North West (keeping the top of the photograph as the North). It therefore follows that the shadows cast should be in the South East direction. However, the shadows of the so called spires are in the opposite direction that is, North West, the same direction as the sun. And that's impossible!

That's what got my attention in the first place! At first sight I thought they were shadows too, but when you take the DIRECTION of the shadows of all the surrounding terrain features into account, then it becomes obvious! Check out the shadows of the cliffs and hills. They are all toward the South East.

Cheers!

Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to post by zorgon

 

The human eye can see a greater contrast range, if a camera was set to take pictures of the stars seen from the moon everthing else would be over exposed, if set correctly for the Astronauts and MOON surface then stars under-exposed so they dont show.

Ah! Here we go again! wmd, can you educate us as to why the astronauts did not take even one pic of the sky to show the world what that "twinklelessness" looks like? Heck! They go all the way to an extraterrestrial environment 240,000 miles away and they don't consider it worth their while to take even one pic of the stars because the Moon's surface would be overexposed? So? What's the big deal in a few Moon surface pics being overexposed? At least we would have got to see what the stars look like from there!

As for no comments from Astronauts re stars even if the astronauts had made some casual observations, there would be nothing remarkable to report, with the notable exception of their "twinklelessness". (Mike Collins does mention this in his book, "Carrying The Fire")

Nothing remarkable to report? Do you speak on behalf of the millions who are interested in what the 'heavens' would look like from another body in space? Let's get real. I'm sure there's some other explanation for not taking/showing photographs of stars and constellations from out there!

Cheers!

reply to post by mikesingh


Well Mike there is evidence of flowing water at some time in the past on mars it also has had active volcanoes it may even have had plate movement at some point in the past all I am showing you is what looks like faces appear here and not just on mars and they are natural!

www.thelivingmoon.com...

Yes Mike looks like something put effort into making that face
Not.

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Yes Mike looks like something put effort into making that face
Not.

Jeeez! And I thought I had found something interesting!

Originally posted by mikesingh

Originally posted by wmd_2008
Yes Mike looks like something put effort into making that face
Not.

Jeeez! And I thought I had found something interesting!

If you ever find something REAL and interesting i'll let you know!

Originally posted by mikesingh
reply to post by depthoffield

 

Hi depthoffield! Though I appreciate the effort you have taken, I suspect you haven't read my entire post in detail before responding.

Now, you have marked what you contend is a rock that is casting that long shadow. But have you analyzed the image in detail? Because if you had, you would have realized that the direction of light is from the North West (keeping the top of the photograph as the North). It therefore follows that the shadows cast should be in the South East direction. However, the shadows of the so called spires are in the opposite direction that is, North West, the same direction as the sun. And that's impossible!

That's what got my attention in the first place! At first sight I thought they were shadows too, but when you take the DIRECTION of the shadows of all the surrounding terrain features into account, then it becomes obvious! Check out the shadows of the cliffs and hills. They are all toward the South East.

Cheers!

I indeed looked with attention only at your pictures here:

Originally posted by mikesingh

And from this 2 pictures, it doesn't result clearly the direction of the sunlight.

After your reply i looked further to this picture:

Originally posted by mikesingh

which at first glance looks like it has the sunlight from north-west, like you said.

But i didn't recognise your first 2 pictures from where they are extracted in the last one. Can you show where?

reply to post by depthoffield


Certainly does look like the mountain,hill and cliff shaded areas in the photo are at one angle (like it would be with a light soure coming from the 10/11 oclock angle in the photo).
And the towers or what some call shadows are pointing into the direction of the light source(Sun)?

It might be a trick of my eyes with it being late evening where I am.

[edit on 20/5/09 by gallifreyan medic]

Originally posted by depthoffield
But i didn't recognise your first 2 pictures from where they are extracted in the last one. Can you show where?

Yep! It's from LO V. The number is lo5-126-h2d

ser.sese.asu.edu...

Cheers!

reply to post by zorgon


For the further clarification here are the specs of the camera and the lens used on the photographs made by astronauts in Apollo mission:

Camera: Hasselblad 500EL (modified)

Lens: SOURCE

Carl Zeiss

80mm f/2.8 Planar T* (Made in Germany)

52° Angle of View, 35mm equiv = 50mm, Max Mag. = 0.8x

Focusing Range: 0.9m (3') - infinity

Synchro Compur shutters in lenses (1 sec - 1/500 sec)

Apertures: f/2.8 - 22

Additional Zeiss Sonnar f-5.6/250 mm telephoto lens which was carried along had the same shutter speeds 1 sec - 1/500 sec as the lens above

Hope that can be helpful to those who think that longer exposures on Apollo missions were possible

Originally posted by mikesingh

Yep! It's from LO V. The number is lo5-126-h2d

ser.sese.asu.edu...

Cheers!

Thanks, Mikesingh.

I lost more than an hour studying it.

Conclusion: YOU ARE WRONG.


You said:

Originally posted by mikesingh

Now, you have marked what you contend is a rock that is casting that long shadow. But have you analyzed the image in detail? Because if you had, you would have realized that the direction of light is from the North West (keeping the top of the photograph as the North). It therefore follows that the shadows cast should be in the South East direction. However, the shadows of the so called spires are in the opposite direction that is, North West, the same direction as the sun. And that's impossible!

That's what got my attention in the first place! At first sight I thought they were shadows too, but when you take the DIRECTION of the shadows of all the surrounding terrain features into account, then it becomes obvious! Check out the shadows of the cliffs and hills. They are all toward the South East.

Nope, wrong!
The sunlight comes from south-east (5' o clock).

The entire image, the lo5-126-h2d image, is, as you informed, this:

ser.sese.asu.edu...

This can be used to check the following observations.



Here is a reduced resolution of it to fit in the screen:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/6eaa5b2f23df.jpg[/atsimg]




Here is the same low resolution image, but with your posted 2 "anomalies" identified on the chart:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/860fc9b478e8.jpg[/atsimg]


You said that the light came from north-west, at 11 o'clock.
But, if you look at the full resolutuion image at various details, you can see that, on the contrary, the sunlight came from south-east, from 5 o'clock!


As an example, look at these craters, marked with blue arrows, how they have the light and dark walls, which indicates the direction of light:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2fd370a8ab55.jpg[/atsimg]


Therefore, your "anomalies", especially that with the "spires", are just natural bumpings on the terrain which cast natural shadows, as I and Agent Venom said before:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/240aa0d811d9.jpg[/atsimg]


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/0d1f1f9267cc.jpg[/atsimg]






So...Can we let those "spires" to rest in peace?


Cheers!

reply to post by 5thElement


Hi,

Don't mean to nit pick but lenses don't have a shutter speed - the camera body does. The lenses control aperture. Admittedly both control the amount of light hitting the film but in different ways.

Peace!