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.

 

Objects on MOON (true color)!

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 06:37 PM
link   
So I came across these two videos, I couldn't help but to think what if these two objects are the same object. Both seem to be blue (true moon color) and also seem like towers erect from ground up. I don't know what the cords are to compare, but I would be interested to know!

This user also has many other interesting photos!

BLUE MACHINE ON MOON



Apollo 10 Moon Mission - Image Id# AS10-34-5172. Very large blue machine,structure, or craft near crater on Moon.

www.youtube.com...

MOON "BLUE CASTLE"



Behind and to the left of the flag holding astronaut is a huge structure suspended in mid-air. It appears to be the infamous "Castle". It is not a reflection, it is not my imagination, it is not the space station, it is not a star, it is not a UFO. It is the Castle on the Moon.

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 20-10-2009 by freighttrain]




posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 06:48 PM
link   
2nd one is very phallic



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 06:52 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 06:55 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Signals
 


lol, well that's what the user called it!



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 07:07 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 07:19 PM
link   
I wasted 6 min of my life watching videos of nothing at all! There is nothing there but camera distortions...sorry but any photographer will tell you that this kind of distortion is common in areas of tricky lighting.

LifENcircleS



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Doesnt look anything like a Castle to me


as for the first video i think he used starcraft units and buildings and edited them somehow either way you can tell there from starcraft.



[edit on 20-10-2009 by Agent_USA_Supporter]

[edit on 20-10-2009 by Agent_USA_Supporter]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Agent_USA_Supporter
 


i was thinking they were "nod" buildings from the computer game "command and conquer"....the second vid looks alot like a phalice(sp).....



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by freighttrain
 


the second anomaly you guys describe as a phallus, my mangekyou sharingan eye sees the "milk bottle" that's been popping up and is being caught on gametrail cameras; discussed on earthfiles.com


idk, maybe its just some bug on the moon, though



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by freighttrain
 


S&F!!!

The first one I'd not seen before.
No denying that one!!!!!! VERY NICE FIND!!

The second one I'd seen before....Hoagland has B&W pics of that one somewhat closer and you can see the wire it's suspended from, not sure what it is or how big it is but it's definitely suspended by a wire of some sort for some unknown reason.

Nice find over all! Thanks!!



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Maybe the second one is a ufo?



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by LifENcircleS
I wasted 6 min of my life watching videos of nothing at all! There is nothing there but camera distortions...sorry but any photographer will tell you that this kind of distortion is common in areas of tricky lighting.

LifENcircleS



So tell me LifENcircleS, how's the water in DENIAL!? My wife is a prof photog and has been for nearly 15 yrs, while neither she, nor I nor any one on here can tell you definitively what that is, we can all tell you what its NOT and camera distortion its NOT.

it's nearly impossible to have a field of view like the craters that surround the image in vid 1 be in perfect focus and have two separate spots nearly in the center of that field of vision be 'distorted'. And don't even get me started on the light angles ...

Thanks, i needed the laugh today.


[Edited for spelling]

[edit on 10/20/09 by RecentlyAwaken]



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   
The second video shows more like a UFO hoovering at a distance than a structure on the surface. S+F



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:20 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:31 PM
link   
The first video shows a retouched photo from the latest fad named ULOs. A mostly blurry photo is colorized to make blurry images take on a new life. When you look at a high resolution uncolorized photo you're not going to see these "structures." They exist in the colorizer's mind. I have the media version of "ULOs - Unidentified Lunar Objects Revealed in NASA Photography" by Allan Sturm. It's a joke! Unfortunately, Jose Escamilla has joined forces with Allan or someone else that colors lunar images.

The 2nd video does NOT show a "castle." What it shows looks like a form of lens flare. The photo shows many reflective surfaces. Additionally, the images of Hoagland's "castle" are all seen from above. Again, this is a joke because that area can be seen in clear photos which show a natural hill or mountain ON the surface. Do you really believe that there is anything as claimed and the astronauts didn't use up all of their film photographing the claimed anomalies?



posted on Oct, 20 2009 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by LifENcircleS
I wasted 6 min of my life watching videos of nothing at all! There is nothing there but camera distortions...sorry but any photographer will tell you that this kind of distortion is common in areas of tricky lighting.

LifENcircleS


It is tough to disagree with this statement. I am still pretty new to the idea of artificial structures on the moon but the more I read these posts the more and more unlikely it is. The truth is what we are after ladies and gentlemen ... keep this in mind at all times.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 06:39 AM
link   
I always wonder why, since there are hi res images available one has to share them using youtube + low res version of the picture heavily retouched, adding lossy compression to some mess.
If one takes a look to the hi res version , untouched, uncropped, uncrapped, uncompressed,
un-[put here what you want] of the image in the first video, then there will be NOTHING out of the ordinary to see.
IF there's actually something anomalous, then the only retouch that can be justified is some outlining (and that would already be some way to FORCE the observer to see what he wants him to see). Pareidolia works even spontaneously.

Comparison between YouTube version, original AS10-34-5172 low res and original AS10-34-5172 hi res:




The source can be found here:
eol.jsc.nasa.gov...
if not available, can be requested here:
AS10-34-5172

Where's the "blue machinery"? It can't be found even in the crappy version of Lunar and Planetary Institute.
www.lpi.usra.edu...
As far as i know, it does exists only on youtube.
Either the blue was added by deliberately colorizing the area with a photo editor, or the copy of the image in question was incredibly crappy: each one of the two cases occurring, would automatically make fall the guy who has made this work into the "unreliable" basket, either for hoaxing or for severe lack of knowledge in what he wants to research (it has been posted in Science & Technology, fortunately our actual Science & Technology have nothing to do with such stuff) but let's give to him a second chance with the second video.
In the second video, he didn't share the image number, but i've tracked it down anyway: it's AS14-66-9232, Alan Shephard & the U.S. flag (image caption: CDR SHEPARD ON LUNAR SURFACE WITH FLAG LOOKING WEST; ASTRONAUT. Also AS14-66-9231 and AS14-66-9233 show an almost identical scene, but the one in question is AS14-66-9232.
First, a link to the source image would allow the observer to look at the image taking his time, rather than wasting 2:53 minutes for NO REASONS.

In my humble opinion, they are glitches, the blue-white is the most common color gradient in this type of glitches in Apollo images:

here's a compilation of glitches from the same roll, the first one even comes from the same picture of the video: notice that their color spectrum variates from the same white-grey to blue: that's NOT some coincidence, IMO.

www.hq.nasa.gov...

See also:

www.hq.nasa.gov...

www.hq.nasa.gov...

one might ask: "but could they be actual objects?"
They are all in the sky after all.

Well, i don't think so. A good answer can be found in AS14-66-9220, for example:

www.hq.nasa.gov...
Since the object is for sure between the camera and the spacecraft's surface, we can guess after some rough calculation that it's a an object some inch wide, if not smaller
Or some alien spacecraft from planet Lilliput

Even more obvious, perhaps the best example of the whole roll 66, is in AS14-66-9221 (notice that the dark background is the spacecraft, not the sky)

www.hq.nasa.gov...

Also
AS14-66-9223
www.hq.nasa.gov...

What would be interesting to know is WHAT exactly caused the glitches: was it some scan failure, some problem with the film emulsion, something else?
In this version of AS14-66-9232
www.nasa.gov...
there are no glitches, this might suggest that they come from two different scans, one of which had the issue: but it's just some uncorroborated speculation by me.
Basically, i can tell you the issue, but not its cause
.
Finally, let me point out that it is just my opinion, and that i would say that my possible explanation, while likely, is inconclusive. Actually, i would be happy if my possible explanation will be proven to be wrong
.

I have to say that the second one was a nice find, the shape is very unusual: from one to ten i'd give a zero to the first video and a six to the second one (for encouragement purposes), regardless what it will turn out to be: it is some anomaly based on some untouched image, hence worthy to be discussed. I'd humbly suggest to the man who made this work, to follow the second way and to leave alone the first one, beacuse by colorizing stuff and messing up with both jpeg artifacts and lossy compression marks he's going to nowhere, IMO.

And freighttrain, thank you very much for sharing this




[edit on 21/10/2009 by internos]



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by internos
 


You are very welcome! You did your research my friend and brought up some good point, I do wonder what the object is in the second video! I just made the assumption that it's the same object as the first video (different angle)!

[edit on 21-10-2009 by freighttrain]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join