It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


[Busted] NASA Tries to Conceal Lunar Structures?

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:21 PM
reply to post by wylekat

I see ROCKS and CRATERS and SHADOWS just like in every other pic of the Moon and/or Mars that someone posts on ATS. Sure someone will say it is something magical, but its not.

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:21 PM
reply to post by wylekat

I see nothing more than craters in that pic.
Am I supposed to see something else?

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:23 PM
I originally thought after seeing the brightened pics that it may have been evidence of a fake background, but the fact that you can see the "scratches" inside that crater in the foreground discounts that idea.

I have been interested in the whole "did they/didn't they" thing for a few years and have swung back and forth between both sides of the argument. I have heard people say they couldn't have gone because of the radiation but have heard pretty good explanations how they could've got round the problem. I can't say for sure whether they went or not, but recently I find myself questioning whether what was shown to the world was the real thing or if it was pre-recorded footage. I find it hard to believe that a government who for years has claimed UFOs are a figment of people's imaginations whilst simultaneously censoring any reports on the subject would allow "live" footage from the moon to be shown. They had no idea what they'd find up there, and anything could've happened.

Also, after all of the hype building to that famous "One small step" moment I wouldn't be surprised to find that they beamed out "rehearsal footage" just to make sure the general populace was kept happy...

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:26 PM
I'd say the picture in question is a sponge.


posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:30 PM
reply to post by wylekat

I see the grey cat that Lichter daraus is looking for!!!

Kidding....he posted on wrong thread accidentally, but it IS funny!!!

edit: Ooops, I mean nosce te ipsum

[edit on 29 July 2009 by weedwhacker]

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:38 PM

Originally posted by dragonridr
Since were discussing videos take a look at the restored videos NASA released for the 40th anniversary. Theres a huge difference in the video.A team of Apollo-era engineers restored the video from the down link centers and with some digital enhancement such as correcting contrast there awesome check them out!

Just for the sake of technical accuracy, the videos you are referring to were made from copies or "off-the-air" broadcast copies or kinescopes (shot with film or video off a TV monitor) Not from the original videotapes which NASA admits were recorded over.

There is NO team of Apollo-era engineers involved the the restoration. It was done by a Hollywood, CA motion picture facility (Lowry Digital) that has expertise in restoring old movies. There was a guy from NASA in charge of the process. (NASA senior engineer Dick Nafzger)

I can find all the links or OR can review a couple recent threads:

They found good copies in the archives of CBS news and some recordings called kinescopes found in film vaults at Johnson Space Center.



[edit on 29-7-2009 by kinda kurious]

[edit on 29-7-2009 by kinda kurious]

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:52 PM
Words fail me. Firstly, obvious scratches on the film are apparently "structures" - and then NASA are guilty of some massive conspiracy for (Wait for it...) adjusting the brightness/contrast on a pic they release!

Sorry OP, but that's pretty desperate stuff. I mean, I can actually accept NASA may be hiding stuff.....sure......but presenting this as evidence? you should be totally embarrassed to be honest

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:53 PM
Someone brought this to my attention a few weeks back, I found it interesting, hope you guys do too. Been bugging the hell out of me it has.

Whats very interesting is the few altered photos taken by Clementine
Something was photo shop airbrushed out in 2 or three of the photos.

Certainly does make you wonder.

If you go to the Clementine Lunar Image Browser

and set the following

1 pixel = 8 kilometers

Then click in the bottom left portion, or corner of the map you will find this airbrushed object.

Click the image and it will zoom in. Totally fascinating. One must ask, What the hell is it?

And there's more:

Picture 2
Picture 3

These anomalies were discovered by Joseph P. Skipper on May 28th, 2004.

Project Clementine Overview:

On February 25,1994 1.8 million photos were taken of the Moon during the Clementine Mission. Different variations were taken including “Full Color” photos. The front cover of this DVD is one of hundreds of photos featured in the film. This is the first time in human history the Moon is being revealed to you in its’ “Full Natural Color.”

On the matter concerning whether or not we went to the Moon, we landed there without a doubt. This film is about what was waiting for us when we got there and the lies put in motion in order to conceal what was found.

Moon researchers and investigators appearing in this film disclose facts hidden from you for over forty years. The facts will amaze and shock you at the same time. You may ask yourself why these lies have been impressed upon us all these years.

The answers to these questions may prove we are not considered equal to those pulling the strings involved in this “greatest of all discoveries you have been denied.”

The suppressing of the evidence that there may have been civilizations existing on the Moon, or even more incredible, the possibility they are still there brings into question why we have been kept in the dark. The biggest insult is we’ve been led to believe the moon is a grey – colorless rock. On the contrary, The Moon appears to be a small planet teeming with life and structures the likes of which you have never seen before until now. At least it appears to have been inhabited in 1994 when these photos were taken.

On the front cover there is a bright silver – bluish disc on the upper right with a light green dome at its‘ center. Comparing it with the terrain below it does not conform with the angle of the surface. The object is hovering above on its’ side. The other disc at the bottom is in correct placement on the surface and is illuminating the immediate area.

“we lied about everything” – BellComm / NASA Insider

[edit on 29-7-2009 by PatriotG]

[edit on 29-7-2009 by PatriotG]

[edit on 29-7-2009 by PatriotG]

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:54 PM
reply to post by The Soothsayer
Agree with you, and said that back a bit. So what is left?
NASA have altered images without a qualifying explanation..until now at least. Maybe part of this thread,(never went to the moon) will be put to bed with new images from Lcross when in final orbit.

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:54 PM
reply to post by Lichter daraus

At the risk of sounding like I have been playing poker with Icke, Cohen, and Maussen- and some of the GFL's space cadets- All will be revealed soon. I promise astounding (well, sorta astounding) revelations, and a lesson to all.

[edit on 29-7-2009 by wylekat]

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:56 PM
Just curious as to why this thread is in the alien and UFO section, lol...

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:56 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

yeah... his post had me blinking and checking where *I* had posted for a second! :-D

Hmmm... Mebbe the Muppet Show had a good idea to get rid of cops:


posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 08:57 PM

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Kadzait

A suggestion to that theory is the flag flag waving in the breeze up on the moon. Taking into account the gravity on the moon suggest that the moon dust is extremely lighter then usual and therefor should give the moon bit of a foggy environment.

NO. There is no "foggy environment" in a place where there is no air. The surface of the Moon is as close to vacuum as you can get. Please research.

...because the picture you showed only prove NASA cannot be fully trusted.

You really should have read through all of the thread, and not just the OP, before posting this. There is still time to edit, to avoid further embarrassment.

Exuberant1, good job! That was a very well formatted and interesting post. I never though NASA would let these picture be let loose so carelessly.

Same comment as just above.....


Like I said I dont look into the subject because it seems irrelevant. I know, then why did I bother posting? It was a interesting post. It seems the choice of my words did get a response after all.

As far as the "foggy environment" goes I dont know whether theres breezes on the moon, it was a theory and I think it is a dumb theory but you can never be sure. I also NEVER said that was FACT, I said it was a suggestive theory and it wasnt my theory. You never know if theres any type of molecules brushing threw space such as solar flairs.

Why would I research threw the thread? I leave my remarks on the OP. Not other comments. Of something is so important for me to comment on then it should have been added to the OP. I'm knew to ATS and if thats the way things are then I mine as well never reply. Its a waste of words.

Avoid further embarrassment? Is ATS all about credibility and reputation? Am I the one embarrassing myself or is it just you wanting to build an ego? You quoted me on a theory that wasnt even a fact. I am not going to bother changing my post and I really dont care about it. I'm starting to lose my interest in the ATS forum because of what its really about. It seems to only be about whether anyone can write a post without holes, not paranormal and strange occurrences.

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 09:03 PM
Nasa is up to no good... I can only imagine what they have been hiding through the years

P.S. I know many people on this site have bee talking about disclosure in the coming years and that the government is helping to do this by releasing movies etc. about alien beings. While I was watching a tv show there were two consecutive new movies coming about aliens. Bizarre.

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 10:49 PM

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I see the grey cat that nosce te ipsum is looking for!!!

I do seem to recall an Apollo Cat photo I posted a while back.

Oh yea, here it is:

Cat On Moon

And it is a "Grey" with nice shadow.

[edit on 29-7-2009 by kinda kurious]

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 11:22 PM
Just adding my two bob's worth...

Here are a couple of strange images I found last week using Google Earth (Moon):



My mind is still open on the possibility that there are objects of possible alien origin on the Moon.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 11:32 PM
reply to post by SpaceJockey

Hey Space Jockey!

Here is your vector object shown in relation to the Apollo 15 mission - I've also inserted an enlargement:

(This area also has some unusual tracks running from near the object right up to the North Complex area. Perhaps the astronauts made an unscheduled and secret journey out to this thing.....)

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 11:45 PM
Thanks for that mate, I really appreciate the addition.

The 'tower' is just a 2 km's to the left on the edge of the valley.

Best way to view and convince yourself that these aren't doctored images is to install the moon add-on to Google Earth and enter the co-ordinates provided with the images I posted.

Also this is near the area Apollo 15 landed, by the St George crater.

posted on Jul, 30 2009 @ 01:40 AM
Hi Exuberant1 - whilst I agree with the majority here that in this instance the 2 images you have selected as your busted shots aren't good examples i.e a (possibly) random designer, like myself, adjusting the levels/contrast of an image for aesthetic purposes, as I have done countless times, and detail of film scratches, which I have seen exactly like these a million times also.. doesn't close the book on the other instances of obvious just means you are directing your energies at the wrong target (IMO)

So I say nice try but no cigar this time - but please keep going.


posted on Jul, 30 2009 @ 01:47 AM

Originally posted by badBERTHA

So I say nice try but no cigar this time - but please keep going.

What do you mean?

This thread has accomplished exactly what it set out to do and will accomplish yet more. (Also, I did not publish my objectives here

And thanks to the efforts of members such as Ziggystar, we have made great progress in answering some important questions about the nature of the altered image.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in