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.

 

NASA's Apollo DSE "Black Box" Transcripts - revealing the unscripted truth about the Moon & E.T.

page: 34
198
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Lunar_Secrets
 

Sorry, you're asking the wrong person, I never see anything that looks like constructions, buildings, mines, etc., and I have been accused of that many times, but to me all that looks natural.

But I will look, if you can be more specific.




posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jra

Originally posted by Ray Amuro
why the earth is so close on this picture? I mean I remember a picture like this one where the earth is more far away from the moon .


Different lenses can change the appearance of size. The photo being shown here was taken with a telephoto lens. The majority of the photos they took on the surface were with a slightly wide angle lens. That will make the Earth appear to be smaller or further away when compared to the one taken with the telephoto lens.


Starred.

Just for the information of others (it's obvious you know your stuff), there's quite good non-technical page with example images here:

www.tutorial9.net...

(Although it's wrong: 50mm is nearly, but not quite, 'normal' on an APS-C sized sensors, because of the focal length multiplier, more like 75-80mm (1.5/1.6x ish) i.e. lower end of telephoto, although 'normal' with 35mm film).



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 




There.. if you're positived that you never seen any kind of anomaly that resembles or might just be artificial, than you probably have a hard time getting the details out in this, but just give it a try.

I you look closely it looks like 2 paw like structures on the sides, reaching up to something that resembles a face.
Still thinking it's a building, but some with design!

Anyways, even if you don't see anything in the upper building, the 3 objects and the bridge must give you something to think about.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Lunar_Secrets
 

I usually do not these things, but when someone points them to me I see them, as in this case.

But even when I see what other people mean I do not see them as artificial, and that also happens in this case, in which I see hills instead of bridges, because I don't see a hole beneath it (sorry for the bad explanation, sometimes I forget the right English words to express what I think, and I even think in English to make it easier
), just an uninterrupted area.

I found another image of that area, but it's hard to identify the craters, at least for me. It can be downloaded here in a GZIP archive. It's a TIFF file of image 5181_med_raw from Lunar Orbiter V.

Images h1, h2 and h3 may show that area, I did not look at them. They are available here.



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
I have spent a good amount of time reading through this thread tonight. I wanted to make sure that I was going to make a post that might have some bearing on the discussion. That being said...

I have spent a good amount of time over the last two years gazing at the moon through my telescope (info here: www.telescope.com...=cassegrains/~pcategory=telescopes/~product_id=09825) using various lenses and filters. I have seen some of the most beautiful structures and terrain but I have never seen anything that looks as if it wasnt formed naturally. No bridges, no domes, no giant pillars or enormous mine shafts.

Now granted, I cant get the magnification down to the scale that some of these pic's in this thread have, but even still, if any of these "non-natural" structures existed, Im positive I would have spotted them by now.

I personally do not believe that there is anything on the moon other than natural crater formations, lava plains and a few man made abandoned vehicles that we left behind. This is not to say that there is not a possibility of these non-natural structures being on the dark side of the moon. I cant exactly look there



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerbyCityLights
Now granted, I cant get the magnification down to the scale that some of these pic's in this thread have, but even still, if any of these "non-natural" structures existed, Im positive I would have spotted them by now.


Do you seriously not see the obvious problem with you line of thought here? congradulations on owning a telescope and everything but it really makes no difference. Who Care?




posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by fieryjaguarpaw
 


Umm, because for less than 500 bucks anyone can see for themselves if there are any signs of ancient civilizations on the moon?



posted on Oct, 18 2009 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 


I don't think so.

If a telescope could be had for $500 that allows us to see lunar structures - there would be alot more pictures of lunar structures.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Actually, you can get a decent scope for around $250 used that is comperable to mine. Throw in another $200 for two or three quality lenses and a filter pack and you have a scope that can produce very detailed and accurate images at high magnifications of the lunar surface. Truth be told, there are thousands of amature astronomers out there who have $1000+ set ups that can see boulder and cone formations in deep craters when the moon is full (less shadows then) and not a single one that I know of has ever spotted anything that remotely resembles man/alien made structures. Dont rely on photos. If this is something that any of you truely want an answer to, save for the equipment and buy it. Then learn to use it properly and you can see for yourself. If you do the searching yourself you find the answer. If you rely on some elses posted photos and opinions you have found nothing more than an interpritation that may or may not be true.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:30 AM
link   
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 





I have seen some of the most beautiful structures and terrain but I have never seen anything that looks as if it wasnt formed naturally. No bridges, no domes, no giant pillars or enormous mine shafts.
Now granted, I cant get the magnification down to the scale that some of these pic's in this thread have, but even still, if any of these "non-natural" structures existed, Im positive I would have spotted them by now.


so if you can't get down to the scale of the pictures how can you say you would have spotted some of these things by now ?

these images were captured with a telescope...









no video link sorry , those pics are old but maybe you are just not looking in the right places ?



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Ahh, Thank you for asking a question instead of knocking me for trying to deny ignorance


Im my first post, I said "some of the pictures here". By some, I was reffering to those pics taken at low lunar altitudes by the orbiters and of course the pics from the lunar surface itself. I can get very good magnification and clarity from my set up; about the same high mag you used for an example but better clarity if the see is good during my view time.

To be quite honest, in your pic where you drew the straight lines, I never would think there was anything as straight as those lines claim in that pic. I can see many highs and lows that dont conform to those lines.

Let me be perfectly clear here about a few things. I do believe in the possibility of other civilizations more advanced and much more ancient than our own. I am not trying to say there is no other civilization but ours. Rather what I am saying is that I have seen first hand the surface of the moon from many different angles and with many different lighting conditions. In all the time I have spent gazing upwards, I have not once seen anything I could clearly say is a bridge or a non natural dome or a monolith reaching for the sky.

With that said, I will agree that there are some interesting sites to view on the lunar surface. There are objects that some may, with a bit of imaginative observance, claim to be proof of cities, mines, what have you. But Im telling you, pay attention to the shadows and learn about lunar crater formation. Also learn about lunar gas expulsions and fissures. The true answers lay with that knowledge.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Hmm.. can't seem to find any resemblence, on any of the 4 pictures. You sure it's the same bright, white impact spot/crater?



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 



Ahh, Thank you for asking a question instead of knocking me for trying to deny ignorance


no problem , i wouldn't try to stop anyone from searching for the truth but when it comes to viewing Moon images , i think denying ignorance can be a subjective term because of differences in personal perception.


I was reffering to those pics taken at low lunar altitudes by the orbiters and of course the pics from the lunar surface itself. I can get very good magnification and clarity from my set up


i'm sure you can but with a telescope, i believe you will never be able to see the detail needed to distinguish between something unnatural or natural unless a supposed anomaly is gigantic in size.

maybe you have seen this before ?...





www.lpi.usra.edu...
mizar.blogalia.com...

could be just an old impact crater that has settled over the centuries but i find the square shape very intriguing. do i think aliens made it ? most likely not but who can say for sure ?



To be quite honest, in your pic where you drew the straight lines, I never would think there was anything as straight as those lines claim in that pic. I can see many highs and lows that dont conform to those lines.


i understand

... the lines i put there were just to show there is some type of geometric shape there and i was not defining anything definite. maybe you can get a better shot of that crater with your telescope ?



But Im telling you, pay attention to the shadows and learn about lunar crater formation. Also learn about lunar gas expulsions and fissures. The true answers lay with that knowledge.


good advice and i always take those things into consideration when viewing the Moon images but at the same time there are some anomaly's that can not be easily explained away as such things and after all ,where not looking for walmart or mcdonalds in these pics , are we ?





www.lunomaly.com...








[edit on 19-10-2009 by easynow]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 


I was just trying to point out that you contradicted yourself. You say that you can't resolve things that some of the pictures show but then turn around and say that if anything was there you would have seen it. This is a contradiction.

Look at the pictures of the apollo craft taken by LRO. They look like dots and no detail is visable. Some on here have even said they are just rocks. The only reason we know what they are is because we already knew in advance what they were. My point is that if LRO can't produce pictures that look like space craft when we know that they are space craft, then why do you think you would be able to see a Moon base with your telescope? I guess if the base was as big as a major city on Earth you might have a chance, but a small base or mining operation would be impossible to see from your backyard.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Lunar_Secrets
 

That's why I said it was difficult to find them, but I think I got the right place.

This is why I think that photo shows the same area.

First, we have this photo.


In Google Earth (Moon view, obviously), I tried to got an approximate view, like this.


Then I found this image, with the names of the craters.

So I guess the area you marked in your post should be somewhere Fabry and Lomonosov.

Sorry for not being more specific.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


I wont deny that there are structures on the moon that are difficult to explain. But at the same time, I just have a hard time seeing true geometric shapes. For example, the pick you posted this last reply showed what appears to be a brownish rectangular shape. If you look closely at that outline though you will see that the shape does not actually follow any sort of straight lines. To me, it looks as though there is a general shape to the area but its defined shape doesn't look rectangular to me. There is just to much deviation along the sides. Also, there are areas where the brown bleeds out of the sides quite far from the area. Almost like there was en eruption that flowed out? I cant claim to know exactly what it is, only what I see in the pics.

It is well known that the moon has seen phases of enormous eruptions that have covered the surface with a fresh skin. Knowing this, I think alot of these pics can be explained by this. When a flow happens, it is actually normal to find large areas of general shapes, but when looking closer, one finds that the shape isn't what it seemed.

Here is a great example of just such a lava field.

www.jpgmag.com...

As I said, I am open to the possibility, but I just have yet to see a picture that can positively convince me that there are non natural structures on the moon. But believe me, if I find one or spot it myself, I will gladly sway my opinion.



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 


thanks for the reply,

yes your right they are not perfectly straight lines and i never said they were. the same thing with the first telescope pics i posted. the lines i put on there are to show the basic shape of the anomaly.

what if alien structures don't have straight lines ? how would you know if you seen a structure built by an E.T. ?



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 


your not looking for something like this are you ?








posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by DerbyCityLights
 


your not looking for something like this are you ?













No, not like that, but I would think there would be some sort of symmetry to an structure that was built for a purpose. I do get what you are saying about structures being built with an outline that may not me straight, but I personally think that if structures were built on the moon, they would be for a purpose. A building with a purpose would be constructed with some sort of logic. A building with a purpose that has a jagged wall or an offshoot that looks similar to a sand blow just doesn't conform to any sort of universal logic when considering utilitarian purposes.

btw, stared that last one for giving me a good laugh


[edit on 19-10-2009 by DerbyCityLights]



posted on Oct, 19 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
I wonder where the civilisation of atlantis went to. . .
Could it be an exchange from the earth to the moon possibly?

[edit on 19-10-2009 by knightsof0ld]



new topics

top topics



 
198
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join