Apollo 12's Covert EVA , Are E.T.'s the reason for the Secrecy ?, page 27

Originally posted by ArMaP
What I think is that the original photos, after being converted to digital format already looked like that,

yups... the artifacts were already there in the prints prior scanning... after all the analogous techniques of 'retouching' quite well match up from that era...

we can see that the lower left area is slightly darker than the rest, so it's natural that conversion to a digital format would create those "ridges",

i'm sorry... but i have to disagree with you on that one... you cannot have identical 'pixelated' compression artifacts.... which on the contrary seem 'softened'...

What I am trying to refute is the idea that those four images are just one, like you said on your first post about this image

well.. you're very much free to any opinion... so is everybody else in respect to their observations.... don't tell me what we conclude here has any affect on tomorrow's sunrise... which in the worst case, would result in the image getting 'removed' or 'replaced'... so in other words, i have not seen any substantiation in your refuter, except probabilities...

And I know that many images are "retouched" to make them more "appealing" (or something like that), so I wouldn't be surprised if this image was subjkected to some of that treatment. After all, they even faked the second image.

lol... mutual ground for peace...

Is it that hard to understand?

check the second image...

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by easynow

---

(I'm still wondering why no one has mentioned that Photoshop did not yet exist in 1969? Is someone going to allege that the Russians were able to "fake" images from their spacecraft Zond 7 ???

Just what sort of image-altering technology DID they have 40 years ago??)

before.....



after.....

Joseph Stalin made use of photo retouching for propaganda purposes.[3] On May 5, 1920 his predecessor Lenin held a speech for Soviet troops that Leon Trotsky attended. Stalin had Trotsky retouched out of a photograph showing Trotsky in attendance. Nikolai Yezhov, an NKVD leader photographed alongside Stalin in at least one photograph, was edited out of the photograph after his execution in 1940.

en.wikipedia.org...

the a/m link actually reads.....

Photo manipulation is the application of image editing techniques to photographs in order to create an illusion or deception (in contrast to mere enhancement or correction), through analog or digital means.[1] Its uses, cultural impact, and ethical concerns have made it a subject of interest beyond the technical process and skills involved.

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by weedwhacker

---

I'm sorry...."fake"??

yes, fake, and obvious fakes to say the least.

hey easy... "take it easy"......

the problem has been fixed.....

Originally posted by jra
I guess you all can blame me for the image getting changed. I sent an email asking about why the image was retouched and I got a reply saying this:

Thanks for letting us know about the problem with that image.

We checked with the folks in the photo lab here, and they believe that the negative for that image probably has a large scratch in that area. The cloning pattern that you mentioned is a remnant from an earlier version of the print using a method that is no longer in use today.

The photo lab has provided us with a “cleaner” version of the photo that isn’t as yellow and doesn’t have the cloning pattern. We will replace the photo as soon as possible.

*cough* *cough*

reply to post by mcrom901

---

Yes, but to you and too easynow....the implications were that the images from Zond 7 were computer-manipulated!!!

I am well aware of photographic techniques, developed since the science of photography was invented!

But, this usually is seen in the prints, NOT in the negatives (if talking film)...correct?

Original negatives, I mean...negatives of the manipulated, cropped, super-imposed, etc can be made, after the image is altered, BY HAND, paint brush, airbrush, whatever. (STILL talking pre-digital computer era, here...)

At least YOU weren't so coyly dismissive...and provided an example...of which I was well aware. Nice to see both ouf you ignored the point...again...of the computer --- which, again, it seems to be the implication here.

Because, reason this is pertinent...the Zond 7 photos?

WHY would they be "faked"?? Enhanced, yes. Made to look "better", perhaps.

BUT, is it the contention of you both that the entire Soviet Zond series of space missions were "faked"???

This is the thing I have a problem with...this nit-picking, and usually dis-information that results. As seen with this baloney about the photos of Earth, taken from space. THEY ARE REAL, even if altered later.

Zond-5 through Zond-8 returned film images of the Moon and Earth from 1968 to 1970. The camera system was developed at the Moscow State University of Geodesy and Cartography (MIIGAiK) under Boris N. Rodionov. Zond-6 and 8 carried a 400 mm camera using 13 × 18 cm frames of panchromatic film. Zond-7 carried a 300 mm camera shooting on 5.6 × 5.6 cm film (both color and panchromatic). The original Zond-8 negatives have been digitized in Moscow to about 8000 × 6000 pixels, and are still among the best close images of that planet.

Source snippet snipped from near the bottom of this link.



And, ALL of this in a thread that is really about a possible "covert" stand-up EVA on Apollo 12?! Which, it should be pointed out, is perfectly possible, and reasonable....given that A) It was only the second mission to land; B) Apollo 11, for many reasons which are easily researched, landed "long" from its intended site; and, C) One stated mission objective of 12 was to land and pin-point the Surveyor 3. In order to show the degree of accuracy possible, and to prove that by actually finding the location (already known precisely) of the earlier lander.

The logical rationale for the "peek-a-boo": stand-up EVA has already been discussed, in this thread. ALSO, the rationale for not making it "public".

First...with the whole world watching live, and with a tight EVA schedule, it would have looked "amateurish" IF they egressed, and then wasted some time getting their orientation...as to the actual direction to walk to find the Surveyor 3.

So, the "pop-up" look made sense, as it was the best view, with a 360-degree panorama available, with some added height.

However, to admit they wished to "cheat" on that, ALSO would look "amateurish"...it wasn't something they cared to admit, back then...as the illusion of 'perfection' was important. This is all perfectly reasonable, to me...and WHY the OP wished to make such a big deal of it is hard to understand.

(In my career as an airline pilot --- you may take this the wrong way --- but there are similar events that occur "behind-the-scenes"... as I've often said to my colleagues, someitmes it's all "show". IOW, what the 'customer/passenger' sees and perceives is sometimes a bit staged, and some of the real drama unfolding doesn't get conveyed to them. Many wouldn't understand the technicalities, and would misinterpret them, sometimes to their detriment. It is always the case when the layperson isn't fully versed, and cannot be, in all the intricate details of a subject that others have spent years learning).

Although, as seen in the following video, and can be researched online, and in books, the accuracy of 12 was pretty well spot-on, as mentioned, it was apparently deemed prudent to be ABSOLUTELY sure, rather than risk an embarrassing delay after egress, and in the process of the EVA.

But, you can here Pete Conrad, at first, seeming to have some uncertainty about the landmarks...so, like I am guessing, they might have discussed it, and decided on the "pop-up" just to be sure.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by mcrom901

---

Yes, but to you and too easynow....the implications were that the images from Zond 7 were computer-manipulated!!!

that is your false 'interpretation' of what was actually being discussed.... the use of 'photoshopic' terms for the purpose of conveying re photographic anomalies had nothing to do as to what medium or technique were used... but rather the image manipulation itself....

you're also mixing up things here... where did you read "computers" in any of easynow's posts.... that you're making such combined assertions...

WHY would they be "faked"?? Enhanced, yes. Made to look "better", perhaps.

BUT, is it the contention of you both that the entire Soviet Zond series of space missions were "faked"???

i'm not in any position (having unlimited access) to come to any such conclusions...

This is the thing I have a problem with...this nit-picking, and usually dis-information that results. As seen with this baloney about the photos of Earth, taken from space. THEY ARE REAL, even if altered later.

www.nizkor.org...

ok... i've had my share already....

reply to post by mcrom901

---

the problem has been fixed.....

brilliant !

you've been watching the STS75 videos again haven't you ! LOL
and nice find on the Stalin image, that's very interesting

*cough* *cough*

ahhh i see you also noticed one of the leak detectors



not that we need it but here's more evidence that shows NASA lies !

"standard responses to UFO public inquiries"
www.nicap.org...

On September 1, 1977, Colonel Charles H. Senn, USAF Chief, Community Relations Division, Office of Information sent a letter to Lt. General Duward L. Crow, USAF (Ret.), working at NASA. In the letter Col. Senn said “I sincerely hope you are successful in preventing a reopening of UFO investigations.” The letter was sent in copy form to other offices as well. In the end he was successful in preventing the reopening. In this case, Col. Senn violated his office charter by not being community relations oriented and definitely not aimed at providing information at the title of his office defines as proper. This should be a starting place for an investigation of why this and other P.I. offices did not and are not freely providing UFO information.

www.mufon.com...

Duward L. Crow

Crow was appointed Assistant Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force. He retired from the Air Force on August 1, 1974.[1] He was subsequently named Associate Deputy Administrator of NASA in 1975

en.wikipedia.org...

hey easy... "take it easy"

ok but only on days that end with Y



[edit on 2-8-2010 by easynow]

Originally posted by easynow

---

ahhh i see you also noticed one of the leak detectors

not that we need it but here's more evidence that shows NASA lies !

"standard responses to UFO public inquiries"
www.nicap.org...

what do you expect... nasa had to find a relief to be able to really concentrate on the scientific projects for us...


any instructional mess.... the af has to be there..... wtf...






seriously.... that "fact sheet" made me lol big time....

i mean the "FACT SHEET"....


John Greenewald Jr. from the The Black Vault did a great presentation on that...

Google Video Link

[edit on 2/8/10 by mcrom901]

Originally posted by mcrom901
yups... the artifacts were already there in the prints prior scanning... after all the analogous techniques of 'retouching' quite well match up from that era...

I think I worded that sentence in a way that may have given a wrong impression. What I wanted to say was that the apparent replacement of some areas of Eath's rim by black happened on the digital version, because it's easier for that to happen, specially in an image for which they say that was "retouched".

i'm sorry... but i have to disagree with you on that one... you cannot have identical 'pixelated' compression artifacts.... which on the contrary seem 'softened'...

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean, could you please rephrase it? Thanks in advance.

well.. you're very much free to any opinion... so is everybody else in respect to their observations.... don't tell me what we conclude here has any affect on tomorrow's sunrise... which in the worst case, would result in the image getting 'removed' or 'replaced'... so in other words, i have not seen any substantiation in your refuter, except probabilities...

Obviously, I don't have access to the original (physical) photos or the first generation digital or the other generations until we reach the one you posted. In the same way that you cannot present real proof of what happened.

lol... mutual ground for peace...

I have said that many times, the first time I noticed that was some three or four years ago.

check the second image...

I know that photo and I know how it can be done, either on the negative or on a positive copy, but just because it's possible doesn't mean it was done.

Edit: look at these two photos and tell me what you think about them, please.



[edit on 2/8/2010 by ArMaP]

reply to post by mcrom901

---

any instructional mess.... the af has to be there

as you already know, they all fall under the DoD umbrella.

what's really amazing is, there are people defending the government lies and do so because they are either on the payroll , completely ignorant or can't handle their belief system being shattered. we have people in this very thread discussing Soviet and DoD images and screaming "THEY ARE REAL" when they have no way of really knowing if that's true and i find THAT more fascinating then the ufo subject itself !

thanks for the Air Force document and the Black Vault video, those are both excellent and the info Greenewald discussed about JANAP 146 further proves beyond any shadow of doubt the government entities continue to lie about ufo's, to this very day. knowing this, how can anyone actually believe if something out of the ordinary was found or seen on the Moon they would tell the Public ? just saying








here's some bullet points, possible fact list you might like,

NASA deliberately lied to the world about Apollo 12 and their actual activities immediately after landing on the lunar surface.

NASA utilized a covert means of communication on the lunar surface, the audio and transcripts of which were entirely stricken from/off the public record

NASA conducted a covert EVA, at least partially exiting the spacecraft via the +X hatch while actively concealing it, never declaring doing it.

NASA did not publicly declare or show the world the imagery of the unique perspective of Statio Cognitium shot during this SEVA.

NASA deliberately sanitized public post-mission documentation to exclude any references to this covert SEVA.

The Astronauts deliberately lied and sanitized their public declarations about the mission to hide evidence of their true complete activities on the lunar surface.

NASA lied about Apollo 15 when they claimed that the declared SEVA during that mission was an Apollo first from the lunar surface.



this pretty much sums it up,

"If you tell a lie that's big enough, and you tell it often enough, people will believe you are telling the truth"

The Big Lie

[edit on 3-8-2010 by easynow]

Originally posted by easynow
reply to post by mcrom901

---

what's really amazing is, there are people defending the government lies and do so because they are either on the payroll , completely ignorant or can't handle their belief system being shattered. we have people in this very thread discussing Soviet and DoD images and screaming "THEY ARE REAL" when they have no way of really knowing if that's true and i find THAT more fascinating then the ufo subject itself !

exactly.... and then why all the silence?

people sudden;y pop off...

i was waiting to hear some more logical facts from them... and then poooof....

here's some bullet points, possible fact list you might like,

NASA deliberately lied to the world about Apollo 12 and their actual activities immediately after landing on the lunar surface.

NASA utilized a covert means of communication on the lunar surface, the audio and transcripts of which were entirely stricken from/off the public record

NASA conducted a covert EVA, at least partially exiting the spacecraft via the +X hatch while actively concealing it, never declaring doing it.

NASA did not publicly declare or show the world the imagery of the unique perspective of Statio Cognitium shot during this SEVA.

NASA deliberately sanitized public post-mission documentation to exclude any references to this covert SEVA.

The Astronauts deliberately lied and sanitized their public declarations about the mission to hide evidence of their true complete activities on the lunar surface.

NASA lied about Apollo 15 when they claimed that the declared SEVA during that mission was an Apollo first from the lunar surface.



this pretty much sums it up,

"If you tell a lie that's big enough, and you tell it often enough, people will believe you are telling the truth"

The Big Lie

thanks matey...

reply to post by easynow

---

thought i would provide a link to some of apollos EVA's www.osti.gov... i believe you can download a full doc here, havent had time to read it but if someone finds something inbox me heres some more scientific stuff if anyone hs time to go through it all haha www.osti.gov...

This new video from LunaCognita is an in-depth look at all the details of Apollo 12's Secret EVA

APOLLO 12's COVERT EVA - Proof of NASA's Off-The-Record Lunar Surface Operations

Egg found in Martian Meteorite
  Posted 18 days ago with 126 member flags

Bizzare Enochian encounter for writer while working with rock band Tool on Faaip De Oiad (Tool song
  Posted 4 days ago with 55 member flags

Bad Ufologists-Lets clean the closet of any skeletons
  Posted 9 days ago with 52 member flags

Ooparts and Ancient aliens
  Posted 2 days ago with 52 member flags

Death by UFO!
  Posted 15 days ago with 49 member flags

UFOs during Satellite launch
  Posted 9 days ago with 49 member flags

Tracey Taylor - "Aliens Gave Me a Special Gift"
  Posted 9 days ago with 31 member flags

DIVINE INTERVENTION: ETs Defeating Old World Order
  Posted 17 days ago with 29 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: