NASA Moon Anomalies III - Other Peoples Work, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 35 times

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 05:16 AM by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Jocko Flocko

"Moon Anomalist", huh, that's a new one for me too fellas...

We are also called Lunar Anomaly Hunters, 'lunar anomaly researchers', and yes Moon/Lunar 'anomalists'.

The inclusion of the term and variations of the term 'anomaly' into these titles stems primarily from the fact that we amateur selenographers tend to post the more interesting and anomalous discoveries that we make.

If you are lucky, you might even catch yourself a glimpse of the "Lunar Archeologist". However, even avid practitioners of lunar archeology are want to deny their involvement once accused - preferring to say things like"I just want to talk about the artificial looking thing, we can't speculate on the age" ...but then they will then do it anyways.

Some Moon anomaly hunters will go so far as to say everything on the moon is ancient and old; 'lunar archeology stuff' they'll say. Be careful of these types.

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 05:54 AM by watchZEITGEISTnow

I just think we should all work together ...

I would love to see any Moon or Mars anomalies - I don't care who shows them!

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 06:14 AM by Exuberant1

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

It sounds like you are gonna like the Hover Melon.

Edit: When I first saw your Flying Fortress I thought 'that looks like a v-1 buzz bomb'. And that was before you had even posted it. Neat-o

[edit on 21-12-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 06:20 AM by watchZEITGEISTnow

reply to post by Exuberant1

Damn, I mean c'mon now - you're just being cheeky...

I'm also wondering what you're holding back!

While I have you here E1, do you have any clue what LO4 images Collier uses in his 96 M&M lecture? I can't find them anywhere... Thanks!

Been checking the LO5's a bit more now - starting to see many different things, especially if you rotate them, and use the brightness/contrast on the windows photo viewer. Also zooming in and out gives some great barrings -

I/We need to somehow put scale into some of these images to compare like you've done, and Sturm by using comparisons of "Terra3" machinery/buildings

[edit on 21-12-2009 by watchZEITGEISTnow]

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 06:32 AM by JohnPhoenix

I am a believer that there are structures on the moon. But in 90% of the pics in the videos and still frames in this thread I see nothing. If you need to trace the object, or highlight it I discount it right away. I feel once you tell the brain what it is supposed to be looking at, you will always see it- even if it's not really there.

For me, I need clearer pictures taken in better light conditions and in color Even a lot of the time in the above videos if you point something out I still cannot see it or it looks just like a natural formation. ie., there is nothing so unique about the object that it cannot be easily explained by conventional wisdom.

I also have a big problem with people posting pics and not stating the file name and a place to download the original pic as well as coordinates. These things should be standard for every picture posted if it is in video or still frame.

Also for each pic we should have measurements of the object, what craft and type of camera took the pic and if possible the height of the craft to the surface. but these are harder to get depending on where the pic comes from.

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 06:35 AM by Exuberant1

reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

I posted a couple of comparison shots here before. Most I don't post. And besides, it takes enough time just finding the darn things let alone finding things to compare them with.

Here is a comparison that I did using some anomalies in an Apollo image to compare with terrestrial equivalents:

Here is a big anomaly from that same Apollo image:

And Remember Folks, It was those Apollo Astronauts who started the whole Moon Mining discussion up again by suggesting that someone was mining the moon (while they were in orbit around it looking down at what they think is a mine):

[edit on 21-12-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 06:38 AM by Exuberant1

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
If you need to trace the object, or highlight it I discount it right away.

I don't.

But that is because I am different than you.

I even highlight things that are perfectly obvious, especially when there are multiple objects of interest in the image and want people to focus on the one I am discussing.

But that's your problem. Go discount some images.

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 06:50 AM by JohnPhoenix

Originally posted by Exuberant1

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix
If you need to trace the object, or highlight it I discount it right away.

I don't.

But that is because I am different than you.

I even highlight things that are perfectly obvious, especially when there are multiple objects of interest in the image and want people to focus on the one I am discussing.

But that's your problem. Go discount some images.

If the object is plainly seen before you highlight it and you highlight it to mark the object as a reference point I can see doing it. If you have to force yourself to believe something is there, then it don't hold much weight for me. I get the image of people tracing over things to make them fit what they imagine they see. I am only asking for more clarity.

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 06:53 AM by Exuberant1

reply to post by JohnPhoenix

Post some of your anomalies.

If you have any...

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 08:05 AM by InfaRedMan

I like this anomaly on the far side!

Underground Nazi Base

IRM

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 01:54 PM by Jocko Flocko

reply to post by Exuberant1

Now that one is interesting, the last image in your post above the Apollo transcript. Here you have a defined structure with smooth walls and shadows being cast from those walls in a correct manner. Now, how this object would appear if photographed again with high resolution technology directly from an above angle is another question... Has there been any newer images taken of this area in past years?

[edit on 21-12-2009 by Jocko Flocko]

[edit on 21-12-2009 by Jocko Flocko]

reply posted on 21-12-2009 @ 02:24 PM by rocksarerocks

reply to post by Traumacrazy

No way man, that's a real plane that flies on the moon, because there is an atmosphere up there. You just need photoshop to zoom all these pictures to infinity to prove what no scientist in the whole world can prove.

reply posted on 22-12-2009 @ 05:51 AM by Exuberant1

Here is a strange tube-like thing that my brother and I found in as08-13-2228hr (towards the bottom right). It sort of reminds me of the tube on that machine Lear found near Lomonosov (see below):

This is the thing/machine from the John Lear moon thread:

Sherpa ordered the High res version of AS8-12-2209 - this is what was on it:

Strange Lights moving across the Lunar Surface. They even illuminate the craters!

Here is an Animation made by Internos:

Frames:
AS14/70/9835, AS14/70/9836, AS14/70/9837

[edit on 22-12-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 23-12-2009 @ 06:49 AM by Exuberant1

I've got another Bermuda Triangle anomaly.

(That's what I am calling things that look like terrestrial vehicles, but are on the moon

)

It is a ship. But which kind I wonder and from when... Are those cargo containers? Is that a turret?

I joke. But it does look like a ship.

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 23-12-2009 @ 10:31 PM by Exuberant1

Okay, time to be serious.

Here is an area I have identified as possibly being geologically active. There is smoke rising from a vent in this shot:

And another from Apollo 15's metric set:

(Sometimes one confuses the dust from mining operations with geological activity or the fires which occur on the lunar from time to time - according to Apollo astronauts)

Forget almost everything you ever thought you knew about the moon.

NASA's latest missions indicate the moon is much more than a dead, unchanging satellite orbiting Earth. It's a dynamic environment, with changes occurring by the day and week, not over millions of years....

..."We used to think of the moon as this really dead and unchanging place, that the moon was a dead planet. ... There are changes that occur there not over the course of thousands or millions or even billions of years, but are changing over the course of days and weeks and months. That's something people just hadn't thought of until just weeks and months ago. ... This isn't your grandfather's moon anymore."

www.cnn.com...

"Weeks and months ago"... that's when Pegasus (Thelivingmoon.com) first published the images of the flashes sighted during the LCROSS mission - right here on ATS.

The reality of the scope of the ongoing Lunar geological activity was scooped by us.

Edit:

Here the Apollo astronauts describe what appears to be fire down on the lunar surface. They could be witnessing the results of some lunar geological phenomenon...

[edit on 24-12-2009 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 23-12-2009 @ 11:28 PM by Cigar

Originally posted by Snarf
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow

please believe me when i say - i believe in Aliens. I believe that the government knows - at least to some extent - about aliens, and keeps it under wraps for whatever reason.

But i just watched all those videos - and i've seen NOTHING. That video from Mike Singh or whatever...i mean come on! Smoking Gun image?

Here's a tip for someone wanting to create a conspiracy video / documentary that will attract open minded skeptics....

Give some analysis. Give some commentary. Tell us what you think is there, and let us decide for ourselves....

I wholeheartedly agree with you. I wasn't able to discern any hardcore evidence from any of those videos. I mean no disrespect to the OP, and like Snarf, I too believe in aliens but this is really stretching it.

reply posted on 23-12-2009 @ 11:30 PM by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Cigar
I mean no disrespect to the OP, and like Snarf, I too believe in aliens but this is really stretching it.

I don't believe in Aliens.

Resorting to belief and faith in Aliens of all things - that's 'stretching it'.

reply posted on 23-12-2009 @ 11:41 PM by OrionHunterX

Originally posted by Exuberant1
It is a ship. But which kind I wonder and from when... Are those cargo containers? Is that a turret?

I joke. But it does look like a ship.

Ah! Thar she blows! I was wondering where Noah's ark was? Now I know!!

Swept by a gigantic wave onto the Moon!

reply posted on 24-12-2009 @ 12:59 AM by Exuberant1

reply to post by OrionHunterX

This pic is better than the Ararat one.

At least this sorta looks like a boat.

Now we just have to check the Cubits ratios.

reply posted on 24-12-2009 @ 03:52 PM by ArMaP

reply to post by Exuberant1

Those things look like small fibres that were on the scanner's glass, I have seen many of those on digitised images (and yes, it's hard to have a perfectly clean glass on a scanner), but it's hard to be even relatively sure about it.

But even if it's not smoke (and I don't think it looks like smoke, although I have to admit I don't have any idea of what it would look like on the Moon) at least it shows that some people are really working on it, looking at the photos, and that's the most important thing.