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.

 

Unexplained Mysteries On The Moon And Mars! An Alien Connection?

page: 17
150
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2009 @ 02:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
If you actually find the proper links or somehow manage to figure out how to obtain the data - send a u2u. Happy hunting!


Perhaps this will help you a little? There are several ways to contact these people and simply ASK for the information you want. I have discovered that asking for information sometimes actually works!



einstein.stanford.edu...

Good luck!




posted on May, 13 2009 @ 03:36 AM
link   
AS10-32-4823

This hasselblad shot captures an interesting anomaly; An angular structure with repeating rectilinear features and multiple tiers, nestled safely in a crater.

I'd build my moon base in a crater - would you?



(grin.hq.nasa.gov...)





[edit on 13-5-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:11 AM
link   
Here's a strange looking structure which I've shaded yellow, near Copernicus found by John Lear...



And here's one strange formation on Mars. Looks like a boundary wall, what?



Probably an optical illusion. All strange looking objects on the Moon and Mars are optical illusions! QED! Case closed! Move on!


Cheers!



[edit on 13-5-2009 by mikesingh]



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


Greetings Mike, Good work!

Here are a few images of a possible moon tower from Apollo 16. It certainly is not the EVA floodlight/boom and does not behave like glare, as is indicated in these images by the azimuth:

*Note how the object does not change height relative to the ground....




With the astronaut where he is in this image relative to the object and camera - we know that it cannot be attributed to glare from the sun.... I could be wrong, but this is definitely a strange' un.






*Check out the object's position relative to the moonbuggy in the last two images...


[edit on 13-5-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by mystiq
Personally, I find some of the information buried from the scientists and NASA in the past to reveal some pretty extensive mysteries on the moon.
And whatever you think of Hoagland, he's the messenger here and relating information (which is why I actually like the guy alot, and his sharp wit).


Thank you for that video. I watched the entire conference, very interesting.



[edit on 13-5-2009 by tim1989]



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


That's an interesting area, but I would only build inside a crater if I had a good way of getting out, climbing those crater walls is not for me.


I will try to find more photos of that crater.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh
Probably an optical illusion.

It's one possibility, the blind are the only people not affected by optical illusions.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


It looks like lens flare, do you have the IDs of these photos?



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


This is lens flare.

NASA No AS14-67-9367


* The images I selected do not demonstrate the properties one expects from lens flare. This I have noted in my post along with some oddities with regards to the relative position of the thing.

I do agree that lens flare is a possibility. Should that be the case, then the photographer must have made a point of keeping it at the same height relative to the moonbuggy and lunar surface.

Given the amount of time that elapsed from one image to the next, the lens flare hypothesis alone becomes inadequate to explain the object. The time lapse also rules out the possibility that it is an orbiting craft or satellite.

...Unless the astronaut is deliberately keeping the flare in the same position, which might account the anomaly. Still, the object has done a good job of imitating the properties an actual physical thing, which may be the result of a highly unorthodox photographic technique by the astronauts.

Even if I'm wrong, someone else will use these images to help their own theory;

... Just wait until the moon hoax guys get ahold of these images - as they are from two different missions. They will say that it is proof that floodlights were used - they might even say that stage-lighting is the only thing that would account for glare that doesn't change position from one mission to the next.
(it's just a matter of time now that the images have been posted)


In case you want to know, I believe the object was located in, around or above the area known as the Sea of Vapors (Mare Vaporum).

Here is what you asked for:

AS15-85-11514
AS16-109-17804
AS16-114-18422
AS16-114-18423


[edit on 13-5-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 09:50 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by cosmokatt7

...Well. you may think I am "touched"..But, I really think we should start

treating the subject of Mars as if it is an extention of Earth... !


well, if its an extension of Earth - surely there will be some Indians living there...everyone knows how we like our extensions....


[edit on 13/5/2009 by booda]



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Here is what you asked for:

AS15-85-11514
AS16-109-17804
AS16-114-18422
AS16-114-18423

Thanks!


I asked because the photos looked too "short", so I wanted to look for bigger versions, with a wider view, and I found them.

AS15-85-11514


AS16-109-17804


AS16-114-18422


AS16-114-18423


One of the reasons I like The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth is the fact that they have the complete photos, not cropped, and sometimes that helps understand what we see.

To me, they look even more like lens flare now.


PS: the second photo is not from The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


A different view of that crater, photo AS17-151-23146.

(click fo full size)

And with more contrast.
(click fo full size)



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


ArMaP, you've just 'outshone'
youself!!

By comparing those uncropped photos to the ones Exuberant is using everything is very evident. The position of the fiducials support the accuracy of your images.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


Could you tell us where did you got that Mars, photo?

I can not find anything like that on those coordinates.

Thanks.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh

Hi Mike,

I have all the respect for all that you bring to ATS in regards to the Moon and Mars anomalies. We have visited just about every picture in your OP at one time or another, so why are we revisiting these again? Do you have anything "new" to bring to the table? It's been a while since you posted some of these pictures, so it is a new crop for some people, I see. I could go back and show you all the original posts of these same pictures, but you know. Anyways, nice new set of stars and flags on the same post! What I'm trying to say is bring us something new bro! You always seem to surprise me with something I've never seen before, until now.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
I keep on forgetting to post this image, for those that like domes on Mars.

There really are domes on Mars, but do not mix them with craters, please.




Mars is indeed a strange planet.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by mikesingh
 


I forgot to answer this post, sorry, the days are too short for work and ATS.


When you say that the lines do not follow the terrain, aren't you forgetting that the image you posted is a 3D model with the real photo "painted" on top of the 3D model?

Even if you had some letters they would follow the terrain because they were painted like that on the 3D model, that's how things are done.

Go to the original thread where undo posted that image (I have to make a database of photos and threads) and you will see that there are more lines like that and, if you follow the lines, they pass on the same spots.



posted on May, 13 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by mikesingh
 


Even if you had some letters they would follow the terrain because they were painted like that on the 3D model, that's how things are done.


That's how NASA rolls...


They don't like to release the new data without tinkering with it, at least several times. That is why we prefer to use older images, asmany of the newer ones have the anomalies airbrushed out.

This is also discussed in the Lear Moon thread which provides good images for comparative study (ie. the tower example) along with discussion on the matter. Kudos for your efforts there

Sometimes they release separate versions of the same data, as is evidenced by the inability of some of the members to locate the tower in newer NASA versions of the following image...

Both jkrog and yourself could not locate the 'tower' in the newer images - as is evidenced by the following posts;

Your post: www.abovetopsecret.com...

jkrogg's post:www.abovetopsecret.com...

*Both of you could not find it - and yet here is the 'tower' in an image from an official source (JPL.nasa.gov):


photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov...

*This image is also available for purchase from JPL and is different than some the versions you can locate on the NASA proper website, in which the tower has been removed.

The tower cannot be attributed to a flaw in the emulsion, or a joining error.
However, the removal of the tower in subsequent images is suspicious, especially when it remains on the version available at JPL....

[edit on 14-5-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Guzzeppi
 

Hi Guzzeppi! There are a couple of pics that haven't been posted before on the net, and these are the tower images (except one). The idea was to get together images from various sources that have yet to be explained. Most of these images were glossed over with a couple of lines of 'comments' and no firm conclusions were arrived at as they were embedded deep in the labyrinths of many a thread!

We have a lot of new members who may not have seen most of the images posted on this thread. It is nice to get their comments too. Something new may turn up.

The truth is out there!

Cheers!



new topics

top topics



 
150
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join