Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter - Will we finally see the Moon Base?, page 15

privacy

Pages: << 12 13 14 15 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 25 times

reply posted on 21-9-2009 @ 05:48 PM by ArMaP

No Moon bases yet, but I noticed something that I think I have never seen on a Moon photo, something that looks like gullies on a crater rim.

Has anyone seen anything like this on the Moon?

Edit: I forgot to say that it's photo nacl00001431.

[edit on 21/9/2009 by ArMaP]

reply posted on 21-9-2009 @ 10:16 PM by Arbitrageur

reply to post by ArMaP

Funny that's so close to the secret moon base they blotted out so we can't see it, just southeast where I drew the arrow:

Actually that appears to just be a glitch with the image browser, just kidding about the secret base, though some people will probably think so when they see fuzzy squares like that!

Jkrog knows a lot about moon geology, he might have an idea.

I don't know if they qualify as Rilles, but there are rilles all over the moon which are gullies of unknown origin. Some near areas of volcanic activity could be collapsed lava tubes. But some look strangely like river beds.

My first guess was that perhaps the heat from the impact in the crater may have made some areas of the rock surrounding the crater rim molten. Then as the heat from the impact subsides, cooling might cause cooling cracks or fissures. Over time, regolith could fill the fissures in until they have an appearance like the photo. Just a guess, I'm no expert on moon geology but Earth geology is a hobby of mine.

But whatever explanation you come up with, none of them seem to explain why they are not appearing more uniformly around the wall of the crater. They seem to be concentrated in that one area.

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 01:13 AM by Skeptical Ed

reply to post by zorgon

I've seen the Moon base! One of them anyway. Or so I thought. Back in the early '80s I acquired many NASA pictorial volumes. One was the big and heavy "LUNAR ORBITER PHOTOGRAPHIC ATLAS OF THE MOON." It has large black and white plates which I scanned with magnifying glasses of various powers. On one plate of the far side I thought I could see 2 UFOs and an oval opening. There was already one UFO in the opening and another one right behind it as if were trying to evade the overhead Orbiter.

When the Internet arrived I started to make claims on the various UFO forums. I couldn't post pictures yet. Then I decided to find out if what I was seeing was real and ordered a poster-size print of the plate from NASA including slides. To my surprise, what I saw on the smaller print did not materialize on the large print. Now, I either made an optical mistake or NASA really airbrushes lunar photos. Of course, I don't accept the airbrushing and just swallowed my pride and forgot about it.

But if you saw the plate in the book, you'd swear that you are seeing what is or may not be there. However, with all of those UFOs being filmed and videotaped over the lunar surface, they must have a parking spot somewhere!

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 01:15 AM by Skeptical Ed

Originally posted by watchZEITGEISTnow
NASA watch ATS and are worried ATS knows more than them - to save face they have to do something.

Perhaps bombing the moon sets up a nice little false flag alien invasion?

Why are we letting a public sector do that without all the worlds peoples consent?

Whoever presses that button should be held responsible. And then sent to the Zetas for extensive internal probing - for a very long time.

wZn

If Salma Hayek is allowed to press that button, I'd like to volunteer to do the internal probing!

[edit on 22-9-2009 by Skeptical Ed]

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 01:18 AM by Skeptical Ed

Originally posted by Majorion
Ah yes, the LRO.....

If the images (if we even get them soon) are anything like the old Lunar Orbiter photos then that will be cool. I havent seen anything that matches the old LO photos.

Though I'm sure JL will see them and he wont be pleased no matter what, lol. This is gonna be interesting. Any dates set for the juicy release?... Knowing NASA, probably not anytime soon.

Regards,

As long as the old Lunar Orbiter photos are not the ones found on the Internet. Their resolution is just shy of the resolution found in print, and you need that difference for details.

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 07:47 PM by zorgon

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
As long as the old Lunar Orbiter photos are not the ones found on the Internet. Their resolution is just shy of the resolution found in print, and you need that difference for details.

Well I guess you just don't know where to look then

How about Apollo? AS11-41-6156 in fact

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 07:57 PM by zorgon

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
I've seen the Moon base! One of them anyway.

Now your talking

Care to show me where? And I will let you know if it matches with the location of Luna... it's hard to see though as most of it is underground

That is why we wanted to have the LRO look at the lobate landslide area more closely... because we were looking not for a base, but signs the rock has been disturbed in the area... like moving rocks, or whitish exposed spots...

Guess what... they did... and we saw what we were looking for. Actually ArMaP did all the work finding them. He saw so many moving rocks he gave up... something I would expect to see if massive amounts of Earth (Moon dirt) were moved as it appears happened in the lobate area

But suffering from prosopagnosia like you do, it won't help much

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 08:05 PM by Skeptical Ed

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
As long as the old Lunar Orbiter photos are not the ones found on the Internet. Their resolution is just shy of the resolution found in print, and you need that difference for details.

Well I guess you just don't know where to look then

How about Apollo? AS11-41-6156 in fact

While I appreciate that, I would have preferred the whole photo: www.keithlaney.net... with the area you cropped circled or pointed to. I, and am sure others, would then find a large copy of the photo, save it and use the infinitesimal zoom feature in Windows Picture and Fax Viewer so that we can see that cropped area. As it is, we don't know where to look. But if you are going to do it, do it for all ATS members to enjoy a little detective work.

Thanks.

[edit on 22-9-2009 by Skeptical Ed]

Never mind, I found the area in the super-large Laney photo. I zoomed in on the area and for this kind of claim you need a higher resolution than what you show. So, you may know where to look but what you found is inconclusive. Not enough to take to the bank.

[edit on 22-9-2009 by Skeptical Ed]

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 08:19 PM by Skeptical Ed

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
I've seen the Moon base! One of them anyway.

Now your talking Care to show me where? And I will let you know if it matches with the location of Luna... it's hard to see though as most of it is underground

That is why we wanted to have the LRO look at the lobate landslide area more closely... because we were looking not for a base, but signs the rock has been disturbed in the area... like moving rocks, or whitish exposed spots...

Guess what... they did... and we saw what we were looking for. Actually ArMaP did all the work finding them. He saw so many moving rocks he gave up... something I would expect to see if massive amounts of Earth (Moon dirt) were moved as it appears happened in the lobate area

But suffering from prosopagnosia like you do, it won't help much

I have to dig out my LOPAOTM which is not easy considering I retired it to a crammed closet a while ago. But I'll dig it out and give you the PLATE number and the LO photo number and the coordinates. It won't do any good though to try to see it on the online version because I had to use a 10X magnifying loupe and the online version will give you only pixels. Give me time.

I don't suffer from prosopagnosia. Isn't this you?:

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 08:21 PM by zorgon

Originally posted by Skeptical Ed
While I appreciate that, I would have preferred the whole photo:

Meh no problem... I have shown that one many times... but hey... with your 29 years of 'practice' I figured you had the know how... I mean I gave you the image number sheesh... that's more than I usually get

But what the heck... just because it perked your interest...

Here is the same clip from a low res version

Here is the location

HERE IS THE NASA Version

Have fun I need to mow the lawn

Toodles

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 08:29 PM by zorgon

Originally posted by Skeptical EdI had to use a 10X magnifying loupe and the online version will give you only pixels.

Well that depends on which online version you use

Did you know they have color clementine images in the 1-2gigabyte range? Need ISIS and Linux to view but still....

Gives you a nice view of Reiner Gamma... and this isn't even from the gigabyte file

I like the redacted crater

Nope no linky... you need to call up the data and generate the image

reply posted on 22-9-2009 @ 08:34 PM by zorgon

reply to post by ArMaP

Most definitely interesting 'gully looking' I will look at the original tonight... I guess we can wait for Jkrog08's expertise on lunar geology

Nice 'fuzzy spot'

I wonder what they are covering up there?

Makes sense that they would continue the same techniques that keep us interested..

Imagine if their 'airbrushing and cover up was flawless... then what would we have to look at?

reply posted on 23-9-2009 @ 03:45 AM by ArMaP