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.
Originally posted by ArMaP
OK, I understand what happened.
Originally posted by bokonon2010
That is why
...
That is not my interest at the moment, I just want to know why the conversion from PNG to TIFF is presented as something suspicious or wrong.
Please do not deviate from the question of the dust at Apollo 15 site, we would like to see which option do you prefer: 1. or 2.
Originally posted by PsykoOps
I for one haven't seen any manipulation in any of the pictures. Are you sure you're looking at the same ones?
Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by bokonon2010
Please do not deviate from the question of the dust at Apollo 15 site, we would like to see which option do you prefer: 1. or 2.
The answer is neither, the choices are not valid.
You have not shown an image from Kaguya. You have shown the image from the LRO and two images taken during the Apollo 15 mission (AS15-9430 and AS15-87-11719). AS15-87-11719 was taken from the LM while descending to land. AS15-9430 was taken from the command module after the LM had landed.
It should also be noted that the angle of the lighting in the LROC and Kaguya image is very different from that in the Apollo mission images. When comparing differences in reflectivity this becomes very important.
Here is the image from Kaguya:
www.jaxa.jp...
The bright area in the Kaguya image appears to correspond to the bright area to the east of the LM in the LROC image.
[edit on 8/1/2009 by Phage]
(Fig 4) The lunar surface reflectivity change from before and after the landing (provided from NASA (left image : AS15-87-11719, right image : AS15-9430))
Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by bokonon2010
So, you are talking about the lack of evidence status regardless of the file format?
Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by bokonon2010
The file formats being discussed are the ones with less limitations, specially TIFF, the most versatile format.
Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by bokonon2010
As it looks like I am unable to make myself understood by you, I will try in a different way.
What format do you wanted those images to be posted?
Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by bokonon2010
I still have the impression that you are answering everything except what I asked.
Do you mean that what made you make your initial post was the publishing of the photos, regardless of the file format?
Or was it the fact that they passed through Photoshop, even if you do not know what happened?
PS: I would like to tell you that English is not my natural language, as I said before I am Portuguese, and I learnt English by myself, so there are many things that I do not really understand and many times I write strange sentences.
Originally posted by ngchunter
reply to post by bokonon2010
If you think Arizona State scientists are liars and conspirators, then prove it. File format conversion is not proof.
Originally posted by bokonon2010
Maybe because your questions are not relevant to the issues we have raised, and you want to shift attention from them?