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.

 

[Exposed] Apollo image Indicative of Lunar Structures?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   
reply to post by and14263
 



Wow thats crazy...

Looks very well like it could be a flying craft.




posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:39 PM
link   
What you have to remember is that if there are huge sheets of glass stationed on the moon then they are going to be extremely hard to see. How many people here have seen friends, maybe even themselves, walk into closed glass sliding porch doors? The only time you can really see the glass is when the light directly reflects off it or if you manage to see your own reflection in it.
For those of you who have a glass conservatory try this. When you're sitting out there on hot sunny days look around you and you will inevitably see these prisms caused as the light is broken down by passing through the glass. There has to be some medium suspended in the lunar skies to cause those prisms.



posted on Jul, 14 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 



Here is an image from Apollo 14 in which chips can be seen all over the otherwise invisible glass dome (their colour is indicative of the presence of Titanium in the glass)


OK...I have to bite. WHAT IN THE HECK am I supposed to see???

I'm sitting here in front of a Samsung widescreen 20" monitor, and that link, when using the little magnifying glass zoom tool....I see a picture of the Moon, the dark sky, a piece of equipement (solar particle collector? What?) and footprints around the equipment. Oh, and craters. OH, and a shadow of that trangular-shaped thingy telling me (as I knew already) that the Sun is very low on the horizon....

...AND there is one little blue anomaly, which is what I assume everyone's jumping up and down about?

Allright....so I take it there is a suggestion that there is a 'crystal dome' overhead (??) and what the blue thingy is, is a flaw in that crystal??

Then, here's a question that no one asks, sorry for being too logical....how did the LM and Astronauts get inside this dome?? Is there a door? If they are outside of the dome, and it's off to the side or background, then why can't we see the base? Certainly it would disturb the ground, where it is resting on the Moon???

Also....this is quite an amazing piece of material, if true....how does it withstand the occasional micrometeorite that is sure to hit it, if it's been there for any length of time?

Finally.....this invisible glass/crystal/magical dome, what is its purpose??

Usually, you build a structure for a purpose...like, on the Moon, a dome would be good to contain an atmosphere or something...

Speculation is fun, isn't it??

edit:

Gonna get my hand slapped for this, surely....but this image:



Looks a heck of a lot like the tachyon plasma 'wake' left by the Starship Enterprise as it goes to warp speed. I mean, I've never actually seen the real Starship accelerate to warp, only seen it on TV and in movies....

[edit on 14 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

Looks a heck of a lot like the tachyon plasma 'wake' left by the Starship Enterprise as it goes to warp speed. I mean, I've never actually seen the real Starship accelerate to warp, only seen it on TV and in movies....



Hah, you're right - it does remind one of the early star trek films; the ship going to warp, etc.

It even looks like the effect they used at the opening credits to the Superman film...
sorta


Hey WW, check out this pic that I found whilst exploring the archives:

Image of EVEN MORE chips in the glass of lunar domes/'peekaboos'

[edit on 15-7-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 04:09 AM
link   
I just found an image which corroborates the theory that some lunar photos were manipulated:

Look at the Shadows Cast by the Fiducials (little plus signs) - They have been added after-the-fact using an overlay; this is a picture of a picture. See also the UFO at the far right...

This image is proof of NASA manipulating the moon images. Here is the image data AS14-66-9306


Edit: Jose Escamilla also found similiar photos. But unlike my colleague, I provide you with the image data.

Here is a screencapture from his new movie 'Moon Rising' - the image highlights these faked fiducials on this photo of a photo:







(I'm joking Jose)

[edit on 15-7-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


The crosshairs was painted on the outher lens or glass on the Hasselblad cameras, right? I don't really know much about the Hasselblad cameras, but it had several lenses or pieces of optics inside it (se attached image) so I assume it to be likely that the shadow from the crosshairs on the front lens could be cast on any other lens or optics further back in the camera. Since the second lens is curved that could explain why the shadow in your picture is curved too.





[edit on 15-7-2009 by Acharya]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by Acharya
 


I see you cannot account for the secondary light source required to produce these fiducial shadows....


NASA has taken pictures of pictures before and resented them to the public whilst omitting this fact. (Examples are available at thelivingmoon.com)

This latest image from my last post is yet another example of unnecessary image manipulation of the part of NASA. It appears the fiducials were added after the image had been taken, and a light source was used to illuminate the image-with-overlay, resulting is shadows being cast by the improperly laid overlay (which was not flat against the image).

Here is yet another example of fiducials being added after-the-fact (Right sight of image, slightly above horizon)



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 05:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Great find and well done Jose


Good work.

reply to Acharya


(1) The Data Camera was fitted with a so-called Reseau plate. The Reseau plate was made of glass and was fitted to the back of the camera body, extremely close to the film plane. The plate was engraved with a number of crosses to form a grid. The intersections were 10 mm apart and accurately calibrated to a tolerance of 0.002 mm. Except for the larger central cross, each of the four arms on a cross was 1 mm long and 0.02 mm wide. The crosses are recorded on every exposed frame and provided a means of determining angular distances between objects in the field-of-view.


history.nasa.gov...

Hope this info helps you mate your theory will not happen in this case .

Thanks

Ocker



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 05:50 AM
link   
reply to post by ocker
 


Hey ocker,

Check out this image of the Earth with what appear to be chips in the glass structure, or 'peekaboo' UFOs:

Earth-Rise through the glass dome on the moon/peekaboos everywhere.

*This is an awesome image.


Edit: Here another image of the Earth-Rise through the Glass/or with UFOs


and another - the best of the three:
This one has Chips Galore. The blue is likely caused by titanium used in the glass to strengthen it and block harmful radiation


The LM being followed by a UFO/ passing in front of Glass structure


[edit on 15-7-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 06:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


You and your good friends never cease to amaze me .

love to know the NASA's photo sequence for the images shown, and check for lens crack in the images taken after this.

Thanks mate

Ocker



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ocker
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


You and your good friends never cease to amaze me .

love to know the NASA's photo sequence for the images shown, and check for lens crack in the images taken after this.

Thanks mate

Ocker



I've already check ocker


These images where taken through the rendezvous window.

The only 'scratch' which does not move is the one immediately next to the Earth. The majority of the bluish chips are not on this window but during the EVAs.

And the other bluish anomalies are similiar to those take on the surface. Such as the ones I posted earlier, which were not taken through this window.

Here are the images which caught my eye and which are taken through the rendezvous window (used in my last post):


AS14-66-9327 through AS14-66-9332

Edit: Here is the very next image after 9332, for comparison sake:

www.hq.nasa.gov...

And just images later, the bluish chips return:

www.hq.nasa.gov...


[edit on 15-7-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 




Exuberant, that claim you make regarding that photo has already been debunked, right here on ATS in another thread.

Firstly, WHY would NASA 'fake' something so obvious??? Not logical, at all.

Secondly, even the caption on the image above is misleading -- as ocker pointed out, the fiducials (crosshairs) were etched on the Reseau plate, which was very, very close to the film stock, but did not touch it.

The film was, of course, color negative film. It was developed back on Earth, then prints made to photopaper. Maybe today's digital age has allowed some people to be forgetful of the 'old-fashioned' way of photography??

The image above appears to be taken with a 'fish-eye' lens attached, and the extraneous light has simply caused a shadow of the cross-hairs to appear in the final photo, after the film was developed.

It is a lighting effect, nothing more.

Same with those tiny blue dots....'crystal domes' ??? A far more reasonable, and less incredible, explanation is simply anomalies of some kind, in the film negatives. Emulsion irregularites? Heck, could even be a stray cosmic ray particle or two, hitting the film!! There are countless more prosaic answers, rather than leaping to the outrageous!



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 08:08 AM
link   
Of equal interest to me,is the object that is laying on the horizon,at the far right of the cropped image!
Anyone want to tell me what that is?



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by scobro
 


Well....do you think it might be some equipment setup during an EVA??

Something like this:



Think this through. Some experiments were set up, they didn't just go about collecting soil samples.

ALSO, any equipment left that was expected to continue operating after they departed would be set a decent distance away from the Lander, so the lift-off thrust wouldn't affect it.

[edit on 15 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by scobro
Of equal interest to me,is the object that is laying on the horizon,at the far right of the cropped image!
Anyone want to tell me what that is?


If you look at the full picture you will see that what you are referring to is the bottom of a large hill! I had to go back and check that out as well.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker

Exuberant, that claim you make regarding that photo has already been debunked, right here on ATS in another thread.






Now you are just making things up - which is why you didn't back up your claim with links...



Here is the image from the same series that Jose used in his film. It could even be the same image, for all you know.


www.hq.nasa.gov...




[edit on 15-7-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 



Now you are just making things up - which is why you didn't back up your claim with links...


That photo has been discussed, on ATS...and I don't have an instant memory to locate it, I don't archive stuff. It will take me some time, but I'll find it for you...

edit:

Look at the picture you linked, in close-up again:
www.hq.nasa.gov...

It pretty well refutes your claim of 'faked' reseau cross-hairs. You can see in other portions of the image, the normal cross-hairs. IF the smaller image, of just a portion of the Ascent Module IS cropped from this large image, then people who use the cropped version are showing a wee bit of dishonesty, no?

In the LARGE photo it is quite evident, just by looking at the shadows, where the Sun was in relation to the photographer. I'd say he was trying for an 'artsy' looking shot, there. I've done the same thing, here on Earth...using the hint of the bright Sun from behind an object in order to get a weird-looking effect.

Again, because of the intensity of the Sun, the exposure was probably upped, and/or the f-stop was upped, to get the detail in the foreground and shade of the LM. The portion where the intensely bright Sun is peeking out exagerrated the lens curvature, resulting in the image seen.


[edit on 15 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 





Again, because of the intensity of the Sun, the exposure was probably upped, and/or the f-stop was upped, to get the detail in the foreground and shade of the LM. The portion where the intensely bright Sun is peeking out exagerrated the lens curvature, resulting in the image seen.


Hang on, the camera's they used where chest mounted and couldn't have there settings changed due to the fact the astronaut couldn't even see the greater part of the camera! All he could do was press a rather large button to take the picture. . . So there's no way he fiddled with the exposure settings or any of the other finer controls on the camera.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 09:31 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


You are wrong - which is why you have not been able to substantiate your hypothesis with any corroborative external source data.... Of course, that would make this just your opinion (or someone else's), and that could hardly be wrong being an opinion. Your opinion is noted.


This image clearly shows fiducial manipulation as can also be seen in images posted earlier in the thread.

The apparent secondary fiducials at the upper-left have been determined to be the result of an improperly placed overlay ontop of an image which was then photographed, giving us this version of AS14-66-9306.





But what does this mean for Apollo....

Are these Images the results of attempts to fool the public by filming some of the mission in a studio? Did the filmmakers neglect to use a camera with the appropriate fiducials result in them being added after-the-fact?

Imagine the implications.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Mintwithahole.
 



Hang on, the camera's they used where chest mounted and couldn't have there settings changed due to the fact the astronaut couldn't even see the greater part of the camera!


The cameras were modified, to be operated with the thick gloves.

They were mostly automatic, but there were focal rings and f-stop rings with larger-than-normal paddles to be operated with gloves.

The information is on the web, if you search hard enough.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join