Apollo Hardware Spotted!

reply to post by ngchunter

That's a good explanation, I just thought one would expect they would have overcome that issue with today's technology. I mean have you seen many black and white pictures of Mars? Most are in color.



[edit on 17-7-2009 by BlueShaman]

reply to post by BlueShaman


Never did like that program. To my telescope, this is how the color looks unadjusted:
farm3.static.flickr.com...

reply to post by BlueShaman


They all started out as what you call "black and white." NASA took at least three images through three different filters with a "black and white" camera, and later combined the three "black and white" images into one color image. The result is far better and will always be far better. With single shot color CCDs you always have more noise and less resolution. Any given CCD chip will always function better without permanent color filters over each pixel. You end up using 1/3rd of the chip for each color instead of using the whole chip for each color with a sequence of greyscale images.

[edit on 17-7-2009 by ngchunter]

Did you see those pictures. Really NASA ?

www.nasa.gov...

can you spot the photoshop lander ?

oh take a look at the shadows. WTF?


WOW

way to shut up the moon hoax ppl, never mind the shadows are right.
my bad.

[edit on 17-7-2009 by thedangler]

[edit on 17-7-2009 by thedangler]

reply to post by thedangler


So now arizona state university, which runs the LRO cameras, is photoshopping the images? Can you prove your accusation or are you just assuming it to be so? Tell you what, next time LRO takes images of the sites, which will happen once they reach their final mission orbit, get yourself a big antenna and download the images straight from the satellite. Then you can reveal to the world how it's not "really there."

[edit on 17-7-2009 by ngchunter]

Im all for waiting. I just think it looks like it was put there.

Ill be waiting.

Yeah I don't think I'd believe anything NASA has to say on the subject.. What has always bothered me is.. They had the technology for live uninterrupted footage of the moon landing in the 60's ? Me thinks not!

reply to post by ngchunter


Thanks!

Very interesting images, but low res will just fuel all those moon-hoax stories.


One thing that I wasn't sure till today - all moon landing were on visible side of the moon?! (by visible, I mean the side of the mone that is toward earth)

Why none of mission was focused to more interesting side of the moon, the one that we can't see from earth?? (except that they used visible data to select landing spot, but in 60's they already had pictures of other side as well, and wouldn't that side be more interesting??)

EDIT: No moon-dust-circles?? I guess those aliens are not advanced that much to leave nice pictures in moon dust.

[edit on 7/17/09 by vietifulJoe]

Originally posted by thedangler
Im all for waiting. I just think it looks like it was put there.

Yeah, to me they look photo shopped. But that's me with an untrained eye etc.,etc.






[edit on 17-7-2009 by Solar.Absolution]

Originally posted by thedangler
Im all for waiting. I just think it looks like it was put there.

Ill be waiting.

Who put it there? How? Since when have there been secret Saturn V's built and launched that no one was able to detect?

Originally posted by vietifulJoe
reply to post by ngchunter

 

Why none of mission was focused to more interesting side of the moon, the one that we can't see from earth?? (except that they used visible data to select landing spot, but in 60's they already had pictures of other side as well, and wouldn't that side be more interesting??)

No radio communications to earth would have been possible. Mission control held their breath anytime a burn had to occur on the far side out of radio contact, trying to do a full landing without help from mission control would have been impossible.

So if this proves they went to the moon then they did see UFO's on the moon and this is the reason for losing/playing with footage or they never went at all and faked the whole thing,hu one of the two

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by kiwifoot

 

Hiya Kiwi, I'm not mocking people with a critical mind or rational thinking...I was mocking the guys that spend their time time trying to wriggle out of the evidence that we landed on the moon. They do it by accusing thousands of people of lying. Fair and honest questions are what draws a lot of people to ATS. I've got questions too

Yeah mate I know what ur on about, sorry if I was a bit sour!

I think on both sides of the argument there just needs to be a little open mindedness.

People believe what they've been taught to believe and won't budge from their veiwpoint.

Will be taking a back seat on this one, will just observe as it's pointless arguing with those who cannot contemplate the notion that what we are told is the, actually isn't.

I hope they do prove the landings, then we can turn our attention to more pressing issues!

All the best mate!

reply to post by weedwhacker


Wow I just teared up looking at those pictures. I have never seen some of them before. The very first one made me so very emotional! I get emotional just looking at the Pale Blue Dot image but seeing Earth not just from a distance but seeing it partially obscured like that really caught me off guard.

Also I CAN see the tracks in some of those pictures they are releasing! How cool! I cannot wait till as someone was saying wait till later on and we will see even better images!

How humbling of an experience it must be to see everything that is going on down here on Earth as just getting smaller and smaller.

I cannot imagine the emotional roller coaster ride it would be to leave the Earth and see it from such a huge distance away with my own eyes.

To put my hand up and block out 4.5 Billions years.... just incredible.

Originally posted by ngchunter
reply to post by thedangler

 

So now arizona state university, which runs the LRO cameras, is photoshopping the images? Can you prove your accusation or are you just assuming it to be so? Tell you what, next time LRO takes images of the sites, which will happen once they reach their final mission orbit, get yourself a big antenna and download the images straight from the satellite. Then you can reveal to the world how it's not "really there."

[edit on 17-7-2009 by ngchunter]

Some people must need glasses. I can clearly see even the golf ball. it says Top Flyte! And he put a cut in it!

Well, I gave myself a nice bout of eyestrain.... Here's hoping that Nasa sends back better pics of the landers. Just out of curiosity... does any of the cameras come with a zoom function?

I understand the resolution on the cameras. I understand it was not in it's mapping orbit... What I just simply don't like is trying to figure out what the heck I was looking at. One of the pics I swear looked like a person standing on the moon.

I'm not gonna look any more. I will wait til they get something that at least is the size of a watch battery..... One of the small ones, ya know what kind. Now... where's the aspirin.....

Um, shouldn't NASA have better technology to take clearer pics now adays. And shouldnt we really have the moon map out already since we went there a long time ago.

Originally posted by oldno7brand
Apollo Landing Sites

Please tell me there's more than just these small low res images...

LOLOL anybody could photo shop those........That is supposed to put the hoax stuff to rest?


Do they really think people are that dumb?

reply to post by thedangler


I just looked at the photos and did the same thing...why is the sun reflecting on the lander in the opposite direction that the sun is shining on the terrain? The shadows go two different ways.

reply to post by kiwifoot


If these images were submitted as proof for an Alien base they would be laughed off the planet and debunked to no end.

All I see is a bunch of dark spots on a lighter background!

These images only prove one thing - that "we went to the moon" dreamers have really good imaginations - kind of like seeing bunnies in the clouds hey...