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.

 

[Sensational!] Strange Features Found in Lunar Images

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 06:39 AM
link   
Greetings Folks,

I know that some of you folks have an interest in lunar anomalies and the like, so I have decided to post some interesting features which I have saved to my computer. I think some of you might enjoy them.

Let's start with this 'standing' stone:




Strange shadow - I can't pinpoint the source of it though(possible eruption/outgassing? help me out here):



Here is high albedo object with a wobbly trail behind it that looks like a mountain or hill-road - but it is probably just as peculiar boulder trail, if anything:




Now check out this one, it is quite colourful. I have never seen a print flaw like it, if that is what it is:



You know guys, it kinda reminded me of this lunar UFO and shadow which was spotted by lunacognita on the Apollo 12 DAC footage:




Some people say that the moon is being mined, or that there is an alien presence on the moon. Could some of the lunar anomalies which are available online be evidence of these things?

If NASA censors images as some claim, how did these ones get past? Is it because the truth so weird that they could afford to miss a few anomalies?

What do you folks thinks about the lunar anomalies and claims of a presence on the moon?






edit on 14-1-2011 by Exuberant1 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 06:53 AM
link   
I think you should change the thread title, this is anything but sensational.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   
There has been photographs like this of the Moon for least 50-60 yrs. It's very exciting tho when you discover about it (I did a few yrs ago), so I can see the "sensational" part.


Some those structures are 10-15 miles tall, 20 km average.




posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:03 AM
link   
I personally don't subscribe to the moon activity theory. Look at the night sky, specifically the moon. There's millions of geeks with eyes and telescopes staring at everything up there every night, no one is mining the moon without them seeing it. Dark side of the moon? pass. I'm not knocking you, just saying i have heard of this and don't buy into it much, seems to improbable for me.

Don't get me wrong, there are some "anomalies" but for me they are more why NASA touched up some photos, and some of the strangeness in some of the Apollo videos, which they later explained as mislabeled I think. Who knows, it's completely possible they faked the moon landing, it's more probable they didn't. It's possible some vast alien race is mining the moon (for what? I thought it was essentially barren) but unlikely for a few reasons....

If there was something worth mining up there, we'd be staring at a giant glowing halliburton logo on the moon each night. If someone else was mining it, we'd be watching the military blow them out into space to mine it ourselves.

If you look at any picture of the moon, mars, any planet, you'll see whatever your mind decides to see. The face on mars? Matrixing, a simple trick of light and shadow.
edit on 14-1-2011 by phishybongwaters because: can't spell apparently



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Like this stuff, cheers for posting.

The first image (AS12-55-7712) looks interesting, as does the one with the shadow/out-gassing/?

Where did you find the first image? I've looked around and can't locate it...any links at all please?

Cheers.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by MasonicFantom
There has been photographs like this of the Moon for least 50-60 yrs. It's very exciting tho when you discover about it (I did a few yrs ago), so I can see the "sensational" part.




I'm glad you can appreciate that aspect of the title.

My anomalies in the OP have never been posted here before. It is their ATS premier.


(Excepting lunacognita's UFO of course)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Where did you find the first image? I've looked around and can't locate it...any links at all please?



Hey bro,

The frame numbers are all on the images.

They can be hard to see because of how I place them, but check 'em again. They are there.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:09 AM
link   
Hydrogen 3 is all over the moon. Which is a highly efficient/clean energy source once we have the means to make use of it (on Ancient Aliens they mentioned 1 shuttle filled can power the entire United States of 300,000,000 greedy energy consumers for a whole yr).

But aside mining, who said they are mining? It's more likely just a colony &/or ancient structures. Or an even more elaborate scenario would be they are the ones that placed the H3 all over the moon for us to eventually use as energy in our evolution.

I personally find it fishy that the U.S., Russia & Japan have sent satellites to image the backside of the moon only to classify 95% of the photographs while brushing the other 5%. Operation Clementine took 1.8 mill photographs and classified like 1.6 million....

& Why astronauts (that walked on the Moon) are saying there's definitely something going on, but NASA denies it. It's very difficult to believe NASA on anything, as many say, NASA = Never A Straight Answer.

As far as geeks with telescopes go, I'm sure any advanced civ is smarter than a geek with a telescope & they likely now stay on the far side. Iirc, Galileo is one person that noted something happening on the moon. He said there were violet lights & they were moving along the surface.
edit on 14-1-2011 by MasonicFantom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by phishybongwaters

If you look at any picture of the moon, mars, any planet, you'll see whatever your mind decides to see.


Speak for yourself.

I don't think you can speak for others on this matter.

It is not good to be seeing things which are not present.

*At best with these images we can say what something looks like, know one here can know what it is.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Hi again,

Yeah, i saw the frame/image numbers you added to the images, but i can't find the original for the life of me.

I'll carry on looking, unless you can direct me to the right website archive.

If not, thanks anyway.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Look like effects on the film..Especially the first pic with the "standing stone", unless there's two identical stones in the pic, one at the top and one down lower..

I wish NASA or whoever would take some descent pics like we all know they can.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:39 AM
link   
I think photos one and three can be debunked logically I have seen this sort of thing quite alot and it could be a blemish on the photo due to converting the Image from film to digital I can prove this if anyone is interested, the other photos not a clue very interesting good find

Star



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:40 AM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


Sorry my mistake I ment photos one and four not one and three



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:14 AM
link   
The first image is mislabled. It is AS12-52-7712, not AS12-55-7712.

I've seen a lot of threads like this, and in every one of them I always wonder, why does the OP assume that the highlighted item is actually a real object and not a photo or scanning artifact?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Saint Exupery
The first image is mislabled. It is AS12-52-7712, not AS12-55-7712.

I've seen a lot of threads like this, and in every one of them I always wonder, why does the OP assume that the highlighted item is actually a real object and not a photo or scanning artifact?



Thanks for the correction bro.

I'm pretty sure the OP pointed out that last image was probably a print flaw. He just said he never saw one like it.

And why are you pretending to know what the OP assumes? I don't pretend to know what you assume, but then I'm not rude and such.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1
Let's start with this 'standing' stone:




I think it's a scratch or something like that on the photo, if it was a 3D object on the Moon it should have the left side getting the Sunlight and the right in the shadow.


Strange shadow - I can't pinpoint the source of it though(possible eruption/outgassing? help me out here):




For that I don't have an explanation, at least not yet.



Here is high albedo object with a wobbly trail behind it that looks like a mountain or hill-road - but it is probably just as peculiar boulder trail, if anything:




I agree.


Now check out this one, it is quite colourful. I have never seen a print flaw like it, if that is what it is:




I think I have seen some of those.
I asked my sister (a professional photographer) and she said that it does look like a slight scratch on a colour photo, when the scratch is not deep enough it does not scratch all the layers of the photo, so it can scratch only some of those layers, one for each colour (cyan, magenta and yellow), but she also said that, if that's the case, it should have more yellow.


Some people say that the moon is being mined, or that there is an alien presence on the moon. Could some of the lunar anomalies which are available online be evidence of these things?
I have never seen any signs of mining or signs of any activity (besides the expected meteor and geological activity), and I think it would be hard to do it without being known.


If NASA censors images as some claim, how did these ones get past? Is it because the truth so weird that they could afford to miss a few anomalies?
I don't think we have ever seen the photos that are really censored (if they exist), the best way is not to publish them.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


AH- HA!


Thanks as always E1 you rock (and shadow) dude!


Now I'd like to post a post LC did on his forum about nasa and his insights:



* * * Reply with quote * * * * Re: NASA Moon Anomalies Images and Videos! Post LunaCognita on Mon Jan 10, 2011 2:38 am Hi there Zeitgeist, and thanks for posting those videos. There are some very interesting features in them! Our Moon is certainly one heck of a fascinating subject to dig into, isn't it? I also definitely get what you mean about the LO 1 and 4 frames that are not available from the ASU archive (or anywhere else) in high res. I wish they were as well, because there are plenty of those frames that I want to get a closer look at! Plus, for LO 2, 3 and 5, there are a ton of frames in that ASU archive that are not even there and are missing entirely, so those missions have not been fully cataloged there either. It definitely is frustrating, considering we are talking about film shot 45 years ago, before Apollo ever went! You are probably familiar with the LPI "Lunar Orbiter Photo Gallery" archive already, but just in case anyone else is interested in checking that LO archive out as well, here is the link to it. www.lpi.usra.edu... They offer some of the images in larger resolution tif format there (usually downloadable as 14 to 18 meg gzip files I think), but their selection of those HR tif files does not include all the frames, just select ones it seems. It is kinda strange how so many decades after these missions, we still are waiting for complete catalogs of their high res scans of this imagery, and it is not just the LO-series they are holding back on. Many, many frames of film shot through the various camera systems employed during the Apollo missions for example are still not available in high res format anywhere online yet. Thousands of images of the Moon shot by those Apollo flight crews have never been released in the online catalogs in anything larger than 450x450-pixel "large thumbnail" framecaps of the NASA archive images - and I literally mean "framecaps" of the raw NASA archive images, because interestingly, the NASA LPI archive - www.lpi.usra.edu... - did not build their low-resolution online "Apollo Image Atlas" by actually using a scanner to digitize the raw archive frames they show us. Instead, LPI and NASA/JSC admit they constructed their low-res Hasselblad archive by getting the original raw NASA frames and putting them on an easel. They then focused a video camera (a video camera that only had about 700 lines resolution) so it was aimed at each of the NASA archive frames of film. This was the way NASA/JSC digitized the imagery for the LPI online "Apollo Image Atlas", and using this ugly technique, each official archive frame of film from the Apollo Program was just frame-captured using a video camera and turned into a "Targa" format image file - a 24-bit color image with the dimensions of 756 x 486 pixels. Then, NASA/JSC processed that Targa image file down to 640x480 and converted it to a jpeg file, dialing up the compression when they did so. After that, LPI (Lunar & Planetary Institute) took those files from NASA/JSC, cropped them, applied further color alteration and resized them even more, shrinking them to the same final 450x450-pixel size imagery that they still offer us in that archive today. So, I guess that raises the obvious question - does anyone happen to have a scanner that NASA can borrow for a week or two? Very Happy Very Happy My mother just got a new scanner, and it took less than a day for her to scan all of our old family photo albums into digital format (a few thousand images probably), yet the LPI archive is still showing us official Apollo imagery shot four+ decades ago that was not even scanned in - it was just framecapped off a video camera then resized and compressed as a jpg file for God's sake! dohh Anytime I hear skeptics try to defend this kind of stuff, I just have to laugh, because the truth is that it would cost NASA next to nothing to provide us with decent high res scans of all the Apollo imagery if they wanted to. Hell, unpaid interns would be lining up down the hall for an opportunity during summer break to do old archive scanning like this for NASA for free, just so they could put it on a resume! My mom, not the most computer literate of individuals, proved that it certainly is not hard to put an original photographic print into a digital scanner and click a mouse button. If there was really nothing to hide in the Apollo imaging archives, then we would not have a problem finding HR examples of every single frame. Do not swallow the excuses NASA gives, because it is not a question of a lack of money or manpower not being available to do the scanning that is the reason we still do not have a complete HR archive of all the Apollo imagery ever shot during those missions. The reason this evidence is not out there and readily available for anyone to look at is because there are things in many of those HR frames that they simply do not want us to see. LunaCognita Posts: 190 Stars: 332 Join date: 2010-09-21 Location: Toronto, Canada View user profile Send private message Back to top


This sums up the whole NASA thing so very very well...




posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow
 


Wow. Thanks for those links. On a whim I clicked on the first link and blew up #4044 H2 (Lunar Orbiter 4 Gallery)

www.lpi.usra.edu...

This pyramid shaped "rock" has and interesting shadow. It is located in center of large crater
lower third of frame.



In the past I've scoured similar images for hours and come up empty.

There goes the weekend. Guess my grass won't get mowed.

edit on 14-1-2011 by kinda kurious because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-1-2011 by kinda kurious because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 08:47 PM
link   
It really sucks that the majority of people really don't care if NASA doesn't disclose all photos. It leaves the people that want transparency on the subject between a rock and a hard place. Unfortunately there aren't enough people that are into astronomy and open disclosure on all aspects of space exploration to really make an impact. Everybody(including the people that find the subject boring) would have to demand it, all at once, for something to actually be done about it. There just aren't enough people
Unless of course you are that hacker dude from a couple years ago that accessed all the non-disclosed photos! If only he would have saved everything and released it to the world as soon as he got it.



new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join