NASA to Take Photos of the Lunar Landing Sites to End Conspiracy Theories

Originally posted by ArbitrageurAs Jim Oberg put it, they are embarrassing themselves,

If that was actually true then why has Jim been working so hard for over 10 years trying to debunk STS75?

I'm not sure where the NASA honesty comment is coming from.

NASA does not lie... they merely don't volunteer information. If your lucky, and know exactly what to ask for you MAY get the info. In the case of the STS 75 film that is NOT offered from NASA They will not release the footage. The copy in question was intercepted live by Martyn Stubbs with a satellite TV station antenna in Canada. In 2000 there was a court battle over ownership of the video... public domain won out... but we still cannot get the data from NASA

As I said they don't lie... they just don't tell you everything

I saw accusations like that in another thread where NASA is claiming ice and debris is actually ice and debris instead of intelligently controlled spacecraft.

Big thread new evidence and Jim is working it overtime... quite a marvelous thread actually... but while Jim is going with 'ice and debris' others are saying 'lens artifacts' . But we are not saying "intelligently controlled spacecraft" We are saying Plasma life forms or CRITTERS



New Analysis Video of the STS-75 Tether Incident
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You really should go and look... Luna made a nice motion study

When I watched the video it looks like ice and debris to me. I think if NASA accidentally photographed a secret satellite, they might edit that out of the picture before releasing it, for reasons of national security, is that what you're talking about?

Thanks to Jim Oberg for linking me to this document. I'm sure he regrets it now It is from STS-61c but I found the following excerpt very 'illuminating'

THE PARTICULATE ENVIRONMENT SURROUNDING THE SPACE STATION:
ESTIMATES FROM THE PACS DATA
Byron David Green

Because several of these particles had clear disks they were not on the camera lens but rather quite remote, >10 m. Based on drag calculations they must have been quite large (larger than cm diameters) in order to persist with negligible motion in the field-of-view, We can offer no better explanation at this time.

Particles were often observed with rapidly oscillating radiance levels as
if they were presenting different geometric aspects to the camera. We believe
they were non-spherical particles rotating. One particle exhibited 47
periodic oscillations during a 2.5 s exposure. We are unable to postulate a
source mechanism which would give rise to such rapidly rotating particles.
Drag would tend to damp these rotations

ntrs.nasa.gov...

I guess I'm not aware of why NASA has such a credibility problem.

Need to pay more attention
Left hand says one thing Right hand says something else.

I challenge YOU to call NASA and ask them for an original copy of the entire STS75 film... there are a few thousand feet as it was over three days. All we have is a few minutes from Martyn...

CRITTERS



This one is on NASA's control room screen






This one from another mission



But as I said that is all in the other big thread... we don't want to drag the motley crew in here now







[edit on 12-7-2009 by zorgon]

reply to post by JimOberg



Jim my post indicates that i was seeking a better explanation and i never implied that a logical explanation would not be accepted by me.

it seems your ego, appears to be as big as the Mare Crisium and has affected your perception of reading comprehension skills.

if dust settles quickly as you claim then you might want to let the boys over at NASA know that so when they BOMB the Moon with their kinetic contraption they will be sure to get their analysis done "quickly"


also your post is missing something called 'evidence' ;P

i think i will take your advice and not believe every rumor i hear


since you were never on the Moon and don't really know what happened i suggest you stop forcing unproven theory's down the publics throat and then maybe, just maybe you will have a chance at not embarrassing yourself further.

reply to post by VitalOverdose

I want to see the flags , the footprints, car tracks, the camera they left..

Think this through, for just a couple of seconds......OK? Thought about it?

OK, just in case you didn't get my point yet, here's why you're going to be disappointed-----

'the flags...': Let's consider an actual example you can understand, closer to home. Google Earth. REALLY GOOD satellite pictures, of familiar things...but, can you see a flag? NO? Because you're looking straight down on it!!! Besides, as zorgon has mentioned, the material the flags were made of may not have lasted for forty years, anyway.

'the footprints...': Again, try using Google Earth to see a footprint on Earth!!! Any idea how big the boots were on the Astronaut's suits? I'm guessing no larger than 27-28 cm...well, IF the LRO can resolve to that detail, then we have a chance....and, perhaps a series of footprints, in a concentrated area, as they overlap? Possible.....

'car tracks...': Same with footprints.

'the camera they left': Small...but, for Apollo 15, 16 and 17 there was a camera mounted on the Rover...Rover is bigger, so like the LM descent stage, should be far easier to discern....

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Think this through, for just a couple of seconds......OK? Thought about it?

OK, just in case you didn't get my point yet, here's why you're going to be disappointed-----

Ach such animosity he was just asking a question put down your sythe

Well okay the flags I will give you and the footprints..

BUT your way off on the 'car tracks'

I for one expect at LEAST the same results as we had with the old time Lunar Orbiter cameras and the Mars Global Surveyor and Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter

If we can't get at LEAST the same resolution as the old 1966-67 images WHY BOTHER sending the dang thing?

Now to further your education Herr Dandelion Snuffer... so you will be 'less ignorant' when answering this question in my absence

Exhibit A

Spirit Rover tracks on Mar near Bonneville crater



Full Size from NASA

Better yet..

Views of Spirit's Rover Tracks
MGS MOC Release No. MOC2-862, 27 September 2004

50cm/pixel resolution







LARGE VIEW 50cm/pixel 30 megs

Under normal operating conditions, the highest resolution images the MOC narrow angle camera can obtain are about 1.4 to 1.5 meters per pixel (4.6-5.0 feet/pixel). An image of 1.4 m/pixel permits objects approximately 4 to 5 meters across (13-16 ft) to be clearly resolved. The new technique developed by the MOC and MGS operations teams, known as cPROTO for "compensated Pitch and Roll Targeted Observation," allows the camera to obtain images that have better than 1 meter per pixel resolution. Typically, the images will have about 1.5 meters per pixel resolution in the cross-track (east-west) direction, and about 50 centimeters (half a meter) per pixel in the downtrack (north-south) direction. These pictures also have an improved signal-to-noise ratio when compared to "normal" 1.5 m/pixel images, thus improving on the overall quality of a typical MOC full-resolution image. MOC cPROTO images allow objects of as small as 1.5 meters (5 feet) to be seen, including the Mars Exploration Rovers and the tracks they make on the surface.

Malin Space Science Systems

Exhibit B

Opportunity
Rover Tracks on Mars



Source and full size image

HiRise image




Full Size image

Source: NASA Photo Journal PIA08816

So it is very obvious we can see things like Rover tracks om Mars from Orbit

I expect the same from LRO

continued....

Exhibit C

Now the following image is from HiRise...

It does NOT matter whether you believe these tracks are made by a machine or by a rolling rock
What matters is that you can SEE THEM

Here is the original image that they were found in... Happy Hunting

hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

Oh okay we will get closer...



Can't see them yet? Buy glasses

Close up...



Enhanced



From Mike Singh's find
www.thelivingmoon.com...

ATS Thread here
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Now then If these are boulders rolling down a hill... I expect at LEAST that quality from LRO



Continued...


[edit on 12-7-2009 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon

Now then If these are boulders rolling down a hill... I expect at LEAST that quality from LRO...

Are you suggesting coconuts migrate!?






I am so excited, can't wait 'til Christmas! (errr....October...ummm?)

reply to post by zorgon


Now that's a reply! Talk about a thread within a thread.

Those were some obvious pictures, I am anxious to see what we see from the Moon this time around with the new camera.

Okay you guys at NASA I know you are here watching...

Now Listen up...

In 1967 you sent Lunar Orbiter Five up there...

From the Defense contractor that made the cameras we get this..

The first three missions, dedicated to imaging 20 potential Apollo landing sites, were flown at near equatorial orbits as close as 22 miles above the lunar surface. The fourth and fifth missions were devoted to broader scientific objectives, and were flown in high altitude polar orbits.

www.ssd.itt.com...

SO That means LO-V was in a high altitude when it took the following image...

The image is of Vitello Crater LO-5-168



The image number with the anomaly is Lunar Orbiter 5, Frame 168-H2 You can get them here
astrogeology.usgs.gov...

Now I won't get into the whole what it argument here, again what is IMPORTANT is that we can SEE IT and this was from high orbit in 1967 with onboard development and TV transmission of data, then printed as negatives on Earth in strips and finally made into prints...

The Story According to NASA

Lunar Orbiter 5, Frame 168-H2

Down slope boulder trail and boulder on the Moon

Lunar Orbiter 5 image of a boulder (just right of center) which has rolled and slid down a slope and left a trail on the Moon's surface. This is within the crater Vitello, and demonstrates the small role that such processes, called gravity wasting, have on the lunar surface. The main source of surface modification on the Moon is meteorite and micro meteorite bombardment. North is up.

Location & Time Information
Mission: 5
Site: Vitello (41)
Frame: 168
Date/Time (UT): 1967-08-17 T 04:04:40
Distance/Range (km): 172
Central Latitude/Longitude (deg): -30.54,322.40
Orbit(s): N/A

The Story According to David Hatcher Childress

"Lunar Orbiter 5 recorded this evidence of objects moving on the Moon on the slope of the central peak of Vitello. In the upper half of this greatly enlarged tiny portion of the original frame, we see two 'boulders' which have rolled down the mountain from the left to right. The larger one, just above the small dark crater, is about 75 feet across and sufficiently irregular to have left a conspicuous tread marked path some 900 feet long. It shines brightly and casts a long shadow into the crater. Near the upper border a 15 foot object with a triangular shadow has left a weaving 1200 foot long trail. George Leonard claimed that the upper object rolled up and out of the crater before rolling downhill to where it is seen in the photo. (NASA, VII Gassendi S 2.4)"

David Hatcher Childress
Extraterrestrial Archeology (1994)

Movement on the Moon Lunar Orbiter V



NSSDC Image Catalog
nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov...

USGS Version - Data Access: Very High Resolution
astrogeology.usgs.gov...

LUNAR ORBITER REVIVED: VERY HIGH RESOLUTION VIEWS OF THE MOON
This is a .pdf file detailing the location of the "Wandering Boulders" with scale detail
www.thelivingmoon.com...

My page on this
www.thelivingmoon.com...

Okay NASA... tell me why I can see a 75 foot 'boulder' rolling 'down' a hill in an old Lunar Orbiter image from 40 years ago but nothing better since?

LRO better come through or I'm coming down there to have words

[edit on 12-7-2009 by zorgon]

Ok, I am a little late into the discussion....as usual.
But I thought I could just leave a mark here of what I think.

First of all, I am one of those who believes that they did land there.
However, I am not so sure that what people saw on their tv-screens was in fact the actual event.

I also believe that they found something up there wich made it near impossible to take any pictures there at all without showing their discovery.

So I believe that they went there, but that the tv broadcast of it might have been done either before or after the launch.

Anyway, if NASA really will go there and take pictures of it that I will be thrilled. But I doubt that would make hoax believers to "switch side" as Zorgon put it. =)
If it shows the landing site with all the things left behind shoing on the pics, I am pretty sure some will scream: CGI!!

However, I think we live in a pretty exciting era....don't you think?

Originally posted by zorgon
NASA does not lie... they merely don't volunteer information....

As I said they don't lie... they just don't tell you everything

OK I'm with you on that.

Originally posted by zorgon
THE PARTICULATE ENVIRONMENT SURROUNDING THE SPACE STATION:
ESTIMATES FROM THE PACS DATA
Byron David Green

Because several of these particles had clear disks....

OK I'll look for the other thread, don't want to go off topic here other than to say I don't see any "clear disks" in the images you posted...but more discussion in the other thread.

reply to post by zorgon

Zorgon this is excellent work on aerial views of some features on Mars! It gives me a better idea of what types of things we might expect to see from the lunar images! Great post, starred!

reply to post by zorgon
We need altitude (topographical) data to tell if all of the motion was all downhill. If parts of the movement were uphill, could the boulder have had sufficient momentum from the downhill roll to climb up the hill? And if the answer to that question is no, then could the boulder have been ejected by a meteorite impact in which case it could roll uphill for quite a long distance as a result of the momentum from such an impact event.

It's really hard to judge what is uphill and what is downhill from these photos alone, the light and shadows can play too many tricks on us.

I wish zorgon ran NASA.

Every time you give us the juice - whereas they give no love.

Amazing stuff (again).

Originally posted by Arbitrageur
It's really hard to judge what is uphill and what is downhill from these photos alone, the light and shadows can play too many tricks on us.

Well I said to ignore that in this post but you need to know one thing... the size of this boulder is bigger than a house 75-80 feet across. That is very easy to prove from the data with the original image

Also the white area is Vitello Peak (still in sunlight) while the dark area is the lower valley floor (in shadow)

I don't care right now whether anyone believes its really a large shiny mining drone or a house size boulder that has a weird motion pattern..

What I want is to see if ITS STILL THERE because if its NOT then I have a still hot phaser cannon

The other two spots we want to see are Tsiolkovsky Crater and an area two hundred kilometers northwards of where they last had Lunokhod 1, because Jack got a laser flash returned from an area that far away

Now with all the space junk on the moon from NASA and Russia, ESA China and Japan... surely something should show up right?

If not we ought to call in NASA charter to serve us

Now just for you...

Phoenix Landing.... Descent parachute


Credit NASA

Color image from Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter's High Resolution
www.nasa.gov...

COLOR IMAGE from MRO? How come Malin's are all black and white then

This was the image I had before... the color one just appeared



www.jpl.nasa.gov...

I did a post in one thread on spaceships on Mars and I can't find it now. My point was that all the images I showed were real spacecraft but I did not include data. As expected the debunkers went nuts..."Its just rocks" "Its just blurry photos" etc The usual... ArMaP and Internos held off because they knew they really were ALL space craft OURS

The idea was to give people a perspective to use to judge what is in photos. If you can't determine that an actual space craft is more than a rock, how can you tell me all there is is 'just rocks'

The response to this 'white blob' were amusing... when a simple check on google would have shown it was Phoenix and parachute



[edit on 13-7-2009 by zorgon]

reply to post by zorgon


i agree, i would like to see if that moving object is still there. it shouldn't be difficult to find it in any new photos since the weird tracks it has made are easy to see.

i wouldn't mind seeing some new pics of the Giant tower that is in the Blair Cupsid area.

www.vgl.org...







square features can easily be seen...




WTF is this ?













www.bibliotecapleyades.net...














lets hope the new pictures showing the landing sites are better than this...

Originally posted by zorgon
I did a post in one thread on spaceships on Mars and I can't find it now. My point was that all the images I showed were real spacecraft but I did not include data. As expected the debunkers went nuts..."Its just rocks" "Its just blurry photos" etc The usual... ArMaP and Internos held off because they knew they really were ALL space craft OURS

The idea was to give people a perspective to use to judge what is in photos. If you can't determine that an actual space craft is more than a rock, how can you tell me all there is is 'just rocks'

The response to this 'white blob' were amusing... when a simple check on google would have shown it was Phoenix and parachute[edit on 13-7-2009 by zorgon]

It was this thread:

Mars Image: Crashed Disc? PIC

Your experiment starts on page two. I still crack up over how the debunkers were shouting rocks and craters

Edit to add OOPS ya found it while I was digging up the pics

Oh well I did the work now and put them on my page so its not a waste


Extraterrestrial Photo Analysis 101

Here are some.... see what you think... But you already know they ARE spacecraft because I told you so I will tell you what they are later

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5a597d493c5e.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/eaaa69db03c5.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/90efab1bf1b7.png[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/750e197bda5a.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3992fe775fc9.jpg[/atsimg]

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9b388204ff4e.jpg[/atsimg]

It can truly be said...

All the above are Alien Spacecraft

[edit on 13-7-2009 by zorgon]

Thats a load of crap.they would not spend that much money to taking pictures of the moon landing vehicals like that.More likely they are going to take pictures of something else on the moon there not talking about.Well it won;t be that willy jeep.Some aliens dumped a willy jeep on the moon when they kidnapped two united states soldiers years ago.I guess that willy jeep is still in some moon crater somewhere.Maybe there taking photos of the alien base on the dark side of the moon to see if there has been any changes since the last lot of photos taken years ago.

reply to post by zorgon


I would like a shot at this while the going is good

This was captured by Apollo 10 It can be found on NASA image AS10-32-4823


The arrow in the full image above points into Stratton K and at the structural object



This Structure is estimated to be four by three km. square at the base and close to two km. tall.

Thanks to Keith Laney for the estimates

Well how about a fly by here ol chaps.

Zorgon, as discussed before I would also like to find out what this is aswell.

Source = www.lpi.usra.edu...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4cf00b08ca28.jpg[/atsimg]

New Image of Apollo 12/Surveyor III Landing Site

www.onorbit.com...

[edit on 13-7-2009 by easynow]