Have You Ever Wondered Where The Stars Went? Proof that NASA has altered their images, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 10 times

Topic started on 20-2-2010 @ 06:53 PM by franspeakfree

There has been a few threads popping up lately where the truthers attack the sceptics and vice versa. I thought I would post this thread to show everyone that there is a common ground that we can all stand on. I believe that ground is NASA. If we can all focus our energies and attention on NASA we can then start to build something together.

Take a look at this video it shows without a shadow of doubt that NASA has tampered with the original frames, the question we have to ask is why? what possible reason would they have to tamper and change the image IF they were not hiding something?

There are many videos that I can show you where certain frames in the hands of NASA have been tampered with, this isn't pure speculation, if your on the fence about the whole NASA/UFO issue then take a look below and tell me what you think?

Is it possible that we can all agree that the images in question have been tampered with? perhaps someone can get hold of the archived images and conduct the experiments themselves by changing the hue and enhancing the images.

Perhaps ATS's resident NASA expert Jim Oberg could pop in and explain why it was that NASA felt the need to crop/alter the colours and the perceptions of some photographs in order to mislead the public?

YouTube Link

[edit on 20-2-2010 by franspeakfree]

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 07:25 PM by Titen-Sxull

reply to post by franspeakfree

Nasa has been known to recolor and crop photos from time to time, this leads to speculation that they are hiding some secret and that they are sinister evil scientists bent on covering something up...

What are they covering up and why?

No logical response has ever been given and no evidence of any of the responses has ever been provided.

I am not a photo expert so I cannot begin to debunk the video fully. however I can poke holes in it's logic mainly by asking:

Okay geniuses, if Nasa is doing all this tampering WHAT have they removed? The Stars? Okay so if the Stars originally did appear why weren't they kept in? Or were there no stars to begin with because it was shot on a studio? Or have they removed aliens?

If space does look different photographed from the moon what difference does it make? Anyone can buy a telescope and look up at the moon and stars and see what they look like from Earth. Are we to believe the Universe is fundamentally different when viewed from Space? Are the stars up there really lightbulbs on strings

Did you know Apollo 16 actually did take photos of the stars from the moon? They had a special LONG EXPOSURE camera. You see the longer the exposure the easier it would be to pick up distant light sources like the stars. The other cameras they had were designed to photograph the lunar landscape not the stars and had shorter exposures...

And what of the thousands if not millions of photography experts, moon scientists, astronomers and other rational sane people who have all seen these iconic images and never once questioned them? If there were something wrong here don't you think ACTUAL EXPERTS would be up in arms?

Nope, all you see are amateurs and yahoos and for good reason. We did go to the moon and we did take photos and video while there. As far as we can tell none of it was secret and certainly none of it was concealing some deep dark sinister reality.

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 07:37 PM by franspeakfree

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
Nope, all you see are amateurs and yahoos and for good reason. We did go to the moon and we did take photos and video while there. As far as we can tell none of it was secret and certainly none of it was concealing some deep dark sinister reality.

Thanks for the post there Titen-Sxull, I am just trying to get the gist of what your saying, are you saying that all the holes picked by amateur photographers and armchair thinkers in all the NASA anomly videos, photos e.t.c are nothing special and I ask you personally, do you believe that NASA has nothing to hide?

I am interested, as I want to hear both sides.

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 07:51 PM by SonicInfinity

I'm pretty interesting in the line phenomenon. Some picture of the moon, when brightened, show parallel lines around the moon. I would say they are photograph artifacts, but the lines oftentimes go behind the moon. How much information do you know about this?

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 08:08 PM by Titen-Sxull

reply to post by franspeakfree

99% of what is claimed to be an anomaly or smoking gun has already been explained away. The shadows on the moon, footprints on the moon, and lack of stars have all been explained.

The only thing I've seen that did raise some eyebrows were some pictures of the lunar surface that had a few areas blurred out. But even there we have no evidence the blur is something being hidden (more likely missing data or other human/mechanical error). Saying these images prove they are hiding something is like saying a dead body proves a murder has taken place, it is attaching intent and blame without knowing all the facts.

I'm no expert and I haven't look at every single moon photo that is claimed to show evidence of a conspiracy but I'd say all of them are likely explainable.

Again what advantage does NASA have for hiding something? I see no evidence of a cover-up and no evidence of what they could possibly be covering up.

Does NASA have something to hide? Perhaps. But seeing as how they openly admitted to losing some of their own original footage I'd say they are more likely to admit their blunders than hide them... I see no evidence that they are hiding something as Earth shattering as many Conspiracy Theorists claim.

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 08:12 PM by Arbitrageur

NASA admits to doing what a lot of photo publishers do, adjusting things like contrast, brightness, color hues, etc, so this is no surprise.

What cracks me up about the video is at 2m30s the author can't even decide whether NASA is cropping things out, or adding things in, or apparently he thinks both, that part of the video makes no sense at all. First he points out that there's only one single shade different in the supposedly cropped area, which is no evidence of cropping as it takes nothing to cause such a small change in the color. And if they really did crop that picture (which there's no evidence they did) they would just expand the cropped area instead of adding that funny looking doodad the video claims NASA is lying about when they say it's a reflection.

NASA is of course hiding anything they would be required by law to hide, such as any photos they accidentally take of classified secret satellites for example. UFO hunters did a segment on what NASA is hiding and they gave an example where some "UFO" pictures vanished and NASA never released them at all, and that was the reason given for a possible explanation, makes sense to me. And it's a lot easier for them to just make the photos disappear than to try to doctor them.

[edit on 21-2-2010 by Arbitrageur]

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 09:27 PM by autowrench

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
I'm pretty interesting in the line phenomenon. Some picture of the moon, when brightened, show parallel lines around the moon. I would say they are photograph artifacts, but the lines oftentimes go behind the moon. How much information do you know about this?

I will try to answer that one for you. Once upon a time, long ago, there was a glass "roof" over the Moon. This is the only explanation I could ever think of, since I discovered the lines, and even the pieces of glass still attached in some places. I am not alone in this thinking either, Richard C. Hoagland and Dr. Bruce Cornet geologist and paleontologist also think as I do on this.
Link

second link

John Lear also think there was some kind of glass structure on the Moon at one time.
To expand on this thought, I would have to say that the glass once completely surrounded the planetoid and contained an atmosphere for inhabitants. Can you think of anything else a glass structure could be used for on the Moon?

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 10:12 PM by (C2C)

I don't trust NASA and would not put this past them. They have been wasting many years doing nothing compared to what they could have been doing in the same period! Tho it may not be their fault because they are told what to do and what not to do, but still.

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 10:20 PM by ucalien

reply to post by Titen-Sxull

99% of what is claimed to be an anomaly or smoking gun has already been explained away. The shadows on the moon, footprints on the moon, and lack of stars have all been explained.

Fortunately, thanks to high resolution satellite images, a load of stuffs caught in space, in Mars or even in Earth's orbit, that NASA experts can't explain, without look stupid or liars, are available on Internet. You know... just stuffs like...

YouTube Link

Underground built entrances in Mars...

YouTube Link

Remnants of ancient statues in Mars...

YouTube Link

A pair of worn boots in Mars...

YouTube Link

A giant statue of Hours in Iapetus...

YouTube Link

Giant spheres in martian ground...

YouTube Link

A fleet of plasma-like giant discoid crafts observing the broken Tether, during the STS-75 mission...

YouTube Link

Liquid water and tubes suply system in Mars...

YouTube Link

Remnants of ancient civilization in Mars...

[edit on 20-2-2010 by ucalien]

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 10:48 PM by MOTT the HOOPLE

NASA is just a waste of money! Like the martian fossil they obliterated "This fossil shouldn't be here so let's just grind it off!"

reply posted on 20-2-2010 @ 11:28 PM by Titen-Sxull

reply to post by ucalien

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Amateur yahoos with their computers and Google Earth think they can post pixelated images, or strange looking rocks, and say they are alien cities or artifacts.

The first video you posted was of a Google Earth/Sky anomaly. As is already well known the data collection process for Google Earth creates photographic artifacts that often appear rectangular or artificial. The recent supposed "Atlantis" Google Earth photo was a product of this data collection. Even if this thing was actually on Mars and was actually rectangular it would be far more likely to be an interesting geological formation than anything alien or artificial.

Taking a look at photos and picking out a few shapes you think are artificial does not count as legitimate research, no more legitimate than staring at clouds or stars and forming shapes or constellations. This is the antithesis of science.

Interesting geological formations exist on Earth. In the past these were blamed on gods or mythological creatures (example: the Giants Causeway). Now the common excuse for planetary geology aliens. The alien answer lacks proof and is just as lazy as the "God did it" excuse for the creation of the Universe.

Also. NASA has never tried to hide any of this stuff, it's all right out there for the yahoos on youtube to make wild claims about.

reply posted on 21-2-2010 @ 01:18 AM by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
NASA has never tried to hide any of this stuff, it's all right out there for the yahoos on youtube to make wild claims about.

What about LPI? Does the Lunar and Planetary Institute modify and alter the images they have in their possession?

*Also, what qualifies you to state that NASA has never hidden "any of this stuff" - are you a contractor/employee? Were you ever?

Please qualify what you mean by "this stuff".

[edit on 21-2-2010 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 21-2-2010 @ 01:30 AM by Titen-Sxull

reply to post by Exuberant1

I was refering to the images in the post I replied to, pictures of rocks and such on Mars which are claimed to be alien artifacts.

Basically any space image that is released. Is it possible NASA has a few stashed away? Sure it is, but they have released a great many photos and images and are pretty forthcoming with discoveries they've made...

I don't know much about the LPI but if it is a science based endeavor I don't think they'd be covering something up.

Editing a photo does not denote intent, we cannot attach sinister malicious intentions just because a few photos are cropped, recolored, or tweaked slightly and we certainly need not assume massive cover-ups about aliens.

reply posted on 21-2-2010 @ 01:38 AM by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull

Editing a photo does not denote intent, we cannot attach sinister malicious intentions just because a few photos are cropped, recolored, or tweaked slightly and we certainly need not assume massive cover-ups about aliens.

Indeed.

I do not believe in aliens - so I rarely consider them as a possible reason to edit imagery.

How would you remove a spy satellite from NASA images in a manner which provides a plausible and believable rational for your alterations?

(So you know, your actions would be justified by EXECUTIVE ORDER 10501)

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10501
SAFEGUARDING OFFICIAL INFORMATION IN THE INTERESTS OF THE DEFENSE OF THE UNITED STATES
Here is a link to the original 10501 Executive Order from 1953 (Eisenhower Admin.)

www.fas.org...

NASA Office of Defense Affairs: The First Five Years
Chapter 14 - NASA SECURITY CLASSIFICATION PROGRAM.
This chapter deals specifically with the discussion surrounding NASA's adoption of their modified EO 10501 National Security interpretation in 1966

history.nasa.gov...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 21-2-2010 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 21-2-2010 @ 01:49 AM by jra

Originally posted by franspeakfree
Take a look at this video it shows without a shadow of doubt that NASA has tampered with the original frames, the question we have to ask is why? what possible reason would they have to tamper and change the image IF they were not hiding something?

Firstly, how do you know NASA is responsible for this tampering? I ask because there are a number of different sites that contain a collection of Apollo photos. Each of these sites has there own way of presenting the photos. Some of them like to do colour and contrast adjustments to make the photos look better. Other sites leave the scans untouched, allowing you to do your own adjustments. If you look at the sites with the untouched scans, you'll notice that the images look washed out. The blackness of space in some of these scans isn't black at all.

For example, take a look at the first photo mentioned in the video. AS15-91-12343. Note that the black space is more of a dark grey/green colour and hasn't been adjusted or corrected at all. Nor has there been any masking of the surrounding space to hide stars. Stars will simply not show up in photos that are set to day time exposure settings. Star light is just to dim and it won't show up in exposures that are taken in fractions of a second. You need exposures taken in seconds to tens of seconds to get stars to appear.

Any masking you might find in Apollo photography is done to make the black space 100% black and it's generally done by the people who host the photos and not NASA themselves. I think LunaCognita, who made that video, should have checked more than one source for Apollo photography.

reply posted on 21-2-2010 @ 04:28 AM by Titen-Sxull

reply to post by Exuberant1

I imagine they are smart enough to not take pictures of any spy satellites to begin (unless they were doing recon on enemy spy sats) with and if they did have pictures of one they could easily simply not release the photo in question to the public at all. They are probably aware of the locations of all satellites before launch, possibly even the secret ones, they probably have to be given an all clear of all space debris artificial or otherwise before they even launch.

That's just my guess...

reply posted on 21-2-2010 @ 04:47 AM by Exuberant1

reply to post by Titen-Sxull

Why do you think NASA would be worried about what they capture in images which they have control over?

We (the public) do not need to know, and images of any devices which are related to National security could be photographed because the images would either be censored or not released.

Anyhow, as you chose to avoid answering my earlier question I shall pose it again and slightly differently:

How would you remove a spy satellite or hardware relating to national security from Apollo images in a manner which provides a plausible and believable rational for your alterations?

(I figured I would be more specific and use Apollo images for this question as they are also the source of much contention and are easily accessible should you have need)

*Note: Saying again that you believe astronauts would not image something related to national security will not suffice - that is a cop-out. If you are unable to envisage and put into words your thoughts on how an object might be removed from a space image, please admit that now. But you are a smart guy, I would like to hear your speculative theory if you have one.

[edit on 21-2-2010 by Exuberant1]

reply posted on 21-2-2010 @ 05:07 AM by Titen-Sxull

reply to post by Exuberant1

I did answer it. I said if by some mistake they did image something pertaining to national security they would not have even bothered releasing that particular photo. Like you said it would be censored and probably not even released. They wouldn't do a cut and paste job and release the photo anyway...

Why not contact NASA and ask them yourself or do a freedom of information act as I am sure anything photographed during the Apollo Missions that was classified then would be easy to get released now.

If they did photograph it and for some odd reason HAD to release the photo anyway I'm sure they could hire a photographic expert to edit the sensitive areas out. All they really would have to do is A) not release the photo or B) Crop the offending portion of the photo out or cut it from the photo altogether

But they wouldn't need to because they wouldn't be releasing it to the public and if they did release a butchered edited cropped photo they would likely try to keep it from becoming well known, iconic or easily available in public record...

If NASA's been spying on satellites that's fine with me and that would be a real reason to hide something... Aliens on the other hand, well most scientists at NASA would probably die from excitement if they found fully formed bacteria in a Martian rock let alone evidence of an advanced race...

reply posted on 21-2-2010 @ 05:39 AM by Exuberant1

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull

If they did photograph it and for some odd reason HAD to release the photo anyway I'm sure they could hire a photographic expert to edit the sensitive areas out. All they really would have to do is A) not release the photo or B) Crop the offending portion of the photo out or cut it from the photo altogether

Thank you for answering the question.

That was quite concise, I appreciate it.

Now, what if someone discovered that several Apollo images had a large percentage edited out or otherwise censored, how do you think that could best be plausibly explained - what would be the most acceptable answer?

reply posted on 21-2-2010 @ 06:42 AM by Cybernet

Well, it's a pretty known fact that NASA doctores many of their images. Not just the ones from the Moon, but from Mars too. Be it removing the sky, blurring or cropping out areas, changing colors, etc. I think there can't be a doubt about that. The question as you ask is "Why?".

My opinion:
Moon - Covering up ancient structures and UFO craft.
Mars - Covering up traces of life.

What i don't understand is, why hasn't anyone posted the dozens of doctored originals in the media (TV)? It would create a chain effect and TPTB would have to come out with the truth.

[edit on 21/2/10 by Cybernet]

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 >> ^^TOP^^