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.

 

National Geographic Moon Photos-I think I found a flub in one of the photos-need 2nd opinion

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by RestingInPieces
 


Just not as of late cause I've been sick for 4 days and when I'm sick, I miss stuff.

I guess it is common for people that are sick to function 100%


I usually question all moon photo's, because some of the recent photo's I've seen display the surface of the moon differently.

You know actual colors and stuff.

[edit on 8-4-2010 by Quickfix]




posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Quickfix
 


I trust my eyeballs. I've been looking at the Moon my whole life, both with telescopes and without. It's grey, so when I see a photo with colors I understand that it's been processed to reveal details. IIRC, the first time I saw it was in pictures from the Galileo probe, which flew by the Earth & Moon a couple of times to build up enough momentum to get to Jupiter. Anyway, Galileo returned some really bizarre false-color images of old Luna (example).

Lunar geologists were able to match the different "colors" with the composition of samples from the Apollo missions; so they could say, "These samples came from that blue area and are rich in titanium*. These others came from that part with a little bit of "blue" and a lot of "orange" - they have less titanium and more aluminum." Thus they were able to look at the whole Moon and say, "This wide area is "blue", so it probably has a lot of titanium. So the whole science of detecting certain elements from a distance without having to go pick them up advanced.
We do the same thing with LANDSAT pictures of Earth.


*I'm picking the elements and corresponding colors randomly - I don't recall the actual correlations.

[edit on 8-4-2010 by Saint Exupery]



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Saint Exupery
 


Yeah examples can be made to look like it is in different colors with highlights and etc.

I just like to see the different elements on the moon and the colors



edited to add: There is something fishy about that moon, its also older then earth


[edit on 8-4-2010 by Quickfix]



posted on Apr, 8 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Quickfix
 


Duuuude! Look at the colooorz! Oh wow...




posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 02:41 AM
link   
I think people keep forgetting that the sun is brighter than the stars and so in turn you can't see the stars. Two the shadows and all may look different cause as some people said that there are craters or take into consideration the moon is being lit not by one source but two. The sun and earth. This photo is not fake. There are other factors that we just can't see or understand.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 07:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Saint Exupery
 


No, that's not the picture I'm thinking of. I am quite capable of discerning flat ground from uneven; don't worry about it - I don't care that much! Suffice to say, this particular picture, the shadow is cast down a slope. Simple



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Saint Exupery
 


Thank you for illustrating our point of the ridiculousness of the shadow argument. Of course most people here are going to accuse you of photoshopping the photos or staging it with spotlights as powerful as the sun.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join