NASA Moon Anomalies III - Other Peoples Work

reply to post by Exuberant1

Thanks for bringing the thread back to its topic!

Those are nice finds, but on the larger versions available on the Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth they look like physical damages to the photos, at least to me.

AS17-134-20416

AS17-134-20424

Originally posted by mcrom901
just came across this.....

Japan space agency announces proof of civilization on earth's moon

www.examiner.com...

[edit on 30/12/09 by mcrom901]

www.lpod.org...

NONO! There is no Inka or Maya or Nazi Town, NO!

[edit on 17-1-2010 by cushycrux]

Originally posted by ArMaP

Those are nice finds, but on the larger versions available on the Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth they look like physical damages to the photos, at least to me.

Physical Damage to the photos - that's what I would do if I wanted to ruin a UFO without removing it.

I would scratch up the print and damage the area, then everything nearby would be attributed to that.

Same with any pipelines, roads or structures; I'd just scratch the hell out that part of the image and do as much damage as thought would suffice to get the job done; to provide people with more choices as to what the things may be.

Most people would never suspect me of any wrongdoing -hehe, most would suspect nothing intentional happened at all...

*But since we all know Apollo was just a grand Hoax, any UFO in the EVA shot is obviously not that. I mean - How'd a UFO get in the studio? Unless maybe they shot this part of the EVA outdoors?






[edit on 17-1-2010 by Exuberant1]

Time for a few of Jack Arneson's finds. They will be new to most of you.

And Another one - is that a tunnel?

*Right click and select 'view image to see images in their entirety.

Find out more about them here:

www.boomslanger.com...



[edit on 17-1-2010 by Exuberant1]

a pipeline in a crater
from lro M102781342LE.IMG

reply to post by mixmix


That image isn't zoomed in enough for me to distinguish a pipeline.

Can you post a bigger, better one of the pipeline?

reply to post by Exuberant1


save the image with right click
and open it with a photo software.

This image is at the original resolution.
I just modify brightness/contrast.

reply to post by Exuberant1

That is very true.

It wouldn't be the first time NASA smudged certain areas of their photos from both mars and the moon. There most definately are structures of some sort up there.

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Physical Damage to the photos - that's what I would do if I wanted to ruin a UFO without removing it.

Yes, much easier than having to retouch the photos.

2 more beautifull craters



need to zoom

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Physical Damage to the photos - that's what I would do if I wanted to ruin a UFO without removing it.

Yes, much easier than having to retouch the photos.

There is more than one way to skin a cat.

And sometimes it is easier to just get rid of everything about the horizon:

Inverted:

*Majorion found this image. He is the one who discovered them 'bucket-filling' the Sky this time (or however else they edited out the fiducials)

ORIGINAL HiRes: history.nasa.gov...






They should have at least tried to add the fiducials

[edit on 17-1-2010 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by mixmix


Could you please point out to us this "pipeline"?

Because I can see noting there.

Also, just thinking logically, can anyone explain why there would be a "pipeline" inside a crater???

I see nothing else to indicate support equipment for this alleged "pipeline". AND, just as in road building, railroad track right of way, etc, the path of lest resistance is chosen...easier to build slightly longer route, to go around obstructions, than to build through them...and a crater is a major obstruction. A very inconvenient obstruction too.

Can someone enlighten us?

reply to post by Exuberant1


Yes I like the rock at the bottom. Like layers.

And I zoom also in the crater where there's a cross cursor.

reply to post by Exuberant1

They should have at least tried to add the fiducials - like with this attempt; albeit a poor one:

Please.

This has been discussed hundreds of times, your claim is unwarranted and unsupported by the facts.

Anyone who is familiar, even in the slightest little bit, with photography, lenses, reflections opn glass plates inside the camera, etc, etc, etc, can recognize that photo for exactly what it is: Taken in a rather artsy way, with the Sun in the foreground, partially blocked by the subject (LM) with the required slightly overexposed settings needed because the light source is in FRONT, and not behind, the camera.

I am astonished that someone who should know better still tries to use this tired old argument, long shown to be false in its premise.......

reply to post by weedwhacker


OK

I post a zoom.



I'm agree with you. Why a pipeline ?
Just a wall of rocks ?
I don't know.

If you look for more pipe, take a look
apollo 11 little west crater panorama


[edit on 17-1-2010 by mixmix]

reply to post by mixmix


Looks a bit lilke a naturally-occuring rille to me, sorry.

Sinuous rilles meander in a curved path like a mature river, and are commonly thought to be the remains of collapsed lava tubes or extinct lava flows. They usually begin at an extinct volcano, then meander and sometimes split as they are followed across the surface. Vallis Schröteri in Oceanus Procellarum is the largest sinuous rille....

Originally posted by Exuberant1
*Majorion found this image. He is the one who discovered them 'bucket-filling' the Sky this time (or however else they edited out the fiducials)

ORIGINAL HiRes: history.nasa.gov...

But not this time, the sky on that photo is not completely black, and the difference does not look to be a JPEG effect.

(click for full size)

They should have at least tried to add the fiducials - like with this attempt; albeit a poor one:

Would the fiducial marks appear on a black background?

Originally posted by ArMaP
Would the fiducial marks appear on a black background?

NASA could be editing out the sky above the horizon and you would have no way of knowing (unless you caught them adding the fiducials in later)

And if they are editing out the sky and fiducials, you would just assume that the fiducials were not detectable due the blackness of the 'sky'. It would be too easy, and people would never suspect it - most people.



*...Were I to replace the skyline with blackness, It would be the same blackness as the fiducials - that would help to ensure that I would get away with editing out everything above the horizon.

People like you would counter anyone who pointed out my devious doings and would do so using the very tools that I had built into each image - all without ever knowing of their existence or purpose....

...I would also rename altered images as the original. As I said; Devious...



Armap,

Why are the fiducials in this image casting a shadow and why are they curved?

image as14-66-9306



[edit on 17-1-2010 by Exuberant1]

reply to post by Exuberant1


You shouldn't pay so much attention to Escamilla.

The marks on the reseau plate which is positioned very close to the film. The marks cast a shadow on the film, that is how it works.

In this image the sunlight enters the camera and the marks cast the "normal shadow". Then, because the light is so bright it is internally reflected by the lens back once again to the film. Because the lens is curved, the reflection of the marks are also curved.

The effect is seen in every image in which the sun appears.


[edit on 1/17/2010 by Phage]

Re the pipeline sorry so called pipeline, if I or anyone else was line pipe you would go for as straight a line as possible to reduce time/cost/material and to improve flow of what ever goes through it.

As for Escamilla saw a prograom on Rods on SKY Tv in the Uk at one point in a helicopter they saw a white streak on the film now Mr Escamilla could tell that this so called rod was 50ft long and a few miles away
It was impossible to tell size speed or distance unless you were him.

Like a few on here 10 out of 10 for imagination zero,nil,nada,zilch out of 10
for abiltity to actually see whats in an image you CANT repeat CANT just keep zooming into pictures and pick out detail.

Here is an example

From HiRise Mars pic

hirise.lpl.arizona.edu...

Details of resolution

51.8 cm/pixel
(with 2 x 2 binning) so objects ~155 cm across are resolved

So something 1.55mtrs can be resolved you wont see any detial on it and these images are a lot better than the Zooooooommmed to death Moon
images posted here.