Do these manipulated Apollo images hide an unknown civilization?

reply to post by 1967sander

First it is the astronaut and now it is not? You confuse me!

So would you please make up your mind? Is it or is it not the other astronaut?

I repeat: This is not the astronaut taking the photo. This is a manipulation of an enlargement of a scan of a print of a negative of a film photograph of a tiny reflection in an astronaut's visor.

I can find and reveal the tiniest bits of contrast deviation on single pixel level and I tell you this "man" is not wearing anything.

No, you can't. Once again: There is only so much information that can be recorded in any given medium.

The grain of the film sets the absolute physical resolution possible. Each transfer of data introduces additional noise. Your claim is simply false. Do you not understand that or what?

Originally posted by 1967sander
By the way the software I use detects manipulations on jpg images, not other formats and as far as I know no other software is capable of finding error levels in compression in other formats than jpg.

I may be wrong, but certain file formats make error level analysis not as effective, some make it an almost pointless exercise depending on the goal, but it can be completed on most image formats. The fact of the matter is that it's just easier to apply it to block base compression, and harder to apply findings to other more flexible forms.

Error levels can be identified by subtraction, and I can't think of an image that can't be subtracted from itself! (Correct me if I am somehow wrong) Furthermore, you can subtract an image from itself to actually work out what compression methods have been used on it in the first place which is a form of error level analysis ... this wouldn't work if it was only jpeg related.

Regarding the software ... I think a large part of it is that it's an easier process to interpret with a jpeg image, and specific attempts to identify compression within compression are quite specialized.

Are they scans? Yes everyone knows that. Does that change the fact that these images have been altered? No. You should understand one thing. NASA started uploading unedited images right after people begun to use the internet

This is amazingly very relevant, as is laying out your method. Chain of control in image processing is one of the most important parts of it IMO. The lack of it in this case is why its taken so long for me to follow on! I only just realised during your video that your abbrieviation was referring to Error Level Analysis. 'ELA' or 'ELC' can actually be sensitive to scanned imagery and can have false positives related to that part of the process.

Now I'm aware of what you're actually doing ...


This is an uncompressed 'pretend' version of your hill. NASA put this through a film scan allegedly. It's actually just a circle I put a gradient through but it will do for my example. I will refer to this as plate #1.


I took plate #1 and saved a compressed version of it with the intention of performing 'error level analysis' on the image. I will subtract plate #1 from plate #2 to retrieve the difference between the two plates.


This is the result of my subtraction: plate #3.

The stair artifact is a common signature of block compression, especially near contrasted edges (black to white etc .... Since jpeg images are organized into blocks of 8 x 8 or sometimes more, error level anylsis will quickly bring these blocks to the foreground (that's the point). I'm assuming that this is part of your method; of course I don't know your method, because you appear very protective of it! However, my results seem again comparable to your own! So my maths can't be that bad.

Forgot: I suppose I forgot a conclusion ... but yes, ELC/ELA whatever you want to call it process like this will cause this in any picture. Am just not sure that this is evidence of NASA editing their own jpegs when they could have gone back to the originals anyway. Can provide more examples if requested.

Originally posted by 1967sander
Watch my other movies and try to explain them!

I noticed at one stage in your youtube career you've gone from processing using sharpening and 'find edges' filters, and are now moving onto medical/biology software ... I don't know.

I'm declaring shenannigans in the politest possible way, though I will apologise if you provide information that proves me obviously incorrect. The offer is always open to have this discussion with me in real time if desired.

For those of you working hard to point out the obvious problems with OP theory... thanks.

And unfortunately, you're probably wasting your time.

I posted proof months ago showing that the "layers" in the infamous birth certificate were nothing but a software artifact... and was accused of being a disinfo agent.

People believe what they want to believe. And no matter how big they put that motto "DENY IGNORANCE" in the tagline at the top of this site, there will always be a HUGE number of people who prefer ignorance to simple logic. It's way more fun to think EVERYTHING is a conspiracy than to study the facts honestly.

And that's why this site isn't going to prove a whole lot over time - there's too much ignorance clogging up the works.

reply to post by Pinke


Hello Pinke,

You almost figured it out but not quite. I did not use ELC / ELA on the hill and although I like your sample, my ELC is far more sensitive and sophisticated than that. On that particular photo I only used A.M.S. which as someone correctly investigated is a new medical high tech software and still in beta phase. (just not only for liver)

Indeed I now have found better (software)channels in (semi)scientific areas (I worked in an academic hospital for a while and now on a dailly basis deal with experts in law enforcement (photo/video) technology. I will be the last person not to admit that even this type of software is capable of making artifacts but the kind of "steps" that are visible in the image are not entirely compression problems. As I said before there is a very clear border between the hill and the steps. If these were artifacts the border would not be as clear and artifacts would be flowing over through the border into the hill. It also does not explain the anomalies on top of the hill. (hope I explain that right)

Regarding the pit with the large blocks. The kind of ELC I use detects the different JPEG compressions. These blocks are the result of someone who used a paint tool and created these blocks him/herself. They are just not visible in the picture. Not by equalization and not by adjusting brightness, contrast or gamma. I will show you the ELC of the "blue man" later today. Than you can see that it is far more sensitive than you just described

Anyway, I am impressed of your skills as an investigator. Maybe you can also analyze my other videos and comment on them and you do not have to agree with me ;-)

Greetz,

Sander

reply to post by DJW001


SO than we agree on the fact that the reflection in the visor is not the astronaut. Exactly what I said. I never said that the "white man" was an astronaut because he is not, correct? Did I not also say that this is a manipulation?

So where is your problem?

Greetz,

Sander

reply to post by 1967sander


Wait a minute, you're admitting to using medical imaging software to manipulate panoramic moon photos?

Seems extremely disingenuous to me.

Shouldn't be surprised though, your previous efforts reek of the same thing.

reply to post by Chadwickus


No I did NOT do the manipulation. NASA did. I only proved that they did. What is against the use of scientific software? Mathlab is also scientific and used by many ATS members, so I do not see a problem and you are twisting my words and putting someone else's words in my mouth sir! I find that rather unpolite of you. Also do
not take it to so personal as I will not. Not even after that low trick you tried to pull.

Originally posted by Frontkjemper

Originally posted by ProudBird
Imagine the immense *team* that wold need to be employed to do this, building a computer that didn't yet exist, writing software that was still a dream for Gates and Wozniak and Jobs.....et al.

standing behind the earth in a dark room. This was done in 1939.

You do realise the first picture of Earth taken from space was in 1946 and it wasn't even the whole earth just the curvature. So your comment = invalid and very much mis-informed.

People please remember dis-info agents work for the conspiracy side of things as well.

reply to post by 1967sander

No I did NOT do the manipulation. NASA did.

Don't lie!

How can anyone believe you when you've been proven to have manipulated images before?

I only proved that they did

You proved nothing.

Panoramic photos are obviously manipulated because they're stitched together, how many times does this simple fact need repeating?

What is against the use of scientific software?

You want to analyse pictures with a beta program designed to image the liver?

On that particular photo I only used A.M.S. which as someone correctly investigated is a new medical high tech software and still in beta phase. (just not only for liver)

Mathlab is also scientific and used by many ATS members, so I do not see a problem and you are twisting my words and putting someone else's words in my mouth sir! I find that rather unpolite of you

Seems to be your own words I'm reading above.

Also do not take it to so personal as I will not. Not even after that low trick you tried to pull.

Nothing personal, just calling it like I see it.

reply to post by 1967sander
I enjoyed your video. Please ignore the comments that question your integrity and honesty. I wonder which division of nasa these guys work for. I find it humorous when these people want to argue over this kind of information when the astronauts that were there now admit these things are true but just cant conceive of our government agencies might actually lie or cover something up.

Originally posted by charlyv
reply to post by NuminousCosmos

 

Also, it's especially relevant today for these images to be preserved. Kodak film negatives will eventually degrade, no matter how hard we try to stave away decay.

Totally agree with that. In the chemical side of photography, where these images were born, you can produce inter-negatives from the original film, however that produces a positive negative (if you will allow for such terminology), then you create a new copy negative by contact printing the new negative film from the inter-negative. This is a very lossy process, and results in loss of edge resolution, as well as color and contrast changes.

This type of process needs to be done to preserve the legacy technology that produced the images because the originals will indeed deteriorate to dust over the years. However, a high resolution digital image needs to be preserved from the original negatives as well to preserve the quality of image. We all know the problem with crossing into the digital realm.....

Once you go digital, you need a solid link to the original so that there is no ambiguity as to how and when it was produced. This is a huge problem today that current science is trying to conquer. It requires impeccable documentation and encryption technology that can prove beyond a shadow that the digital image was indeed copied from a specified original image.

I have to say your summation of this issue is really well laid out. One of my hobbies is old photo restoration, and it brings me nothing but sorrow when I scan in early negatives only to be confronted with extreme degradation in the source. Of course, the guys at ASU have impressive drum scanners and much more advanced equipment then I do

As to the topic at hand, I feel that attacking the OP by calling him ignorant or dishonest is unfair. I believe that he believes he's discovered incredible things. I, and it looks like several others here, think it's more of a 'massaging data' situation. I didn't join a conspiracy site to debunk all conspiracies...but I feel I have to use my skeptics' toolbox to explain my point of view to things that I have some specific knowledge in.

So, again, I ask a basic question: Why did NASA alter and airbrush photos-when it would have been so much easier to claim that the images were underdeveloped/radiation damaged? Why spend so much effort doing that?

Originally posted by 1967sander
reply to post by BrnBdry

 

Thanks for the support m8.

For those who think that NASA's TIF files are the real deal: Open your eyes!

Filename - as08-13-2344.tif
ImageWidth - 4126
ImageLength - 4278
BitsPerSample - 8 8 8
Compression - 1 (None)
PhotometricInterpretation - 2
StripOffset - 24514
Orientation - Top left
SamplesPerPixel - 3
RowsPerStrip - 4278
StripByteCount - 52953084
XResolution - 300.00
YResolution - 300.00
PlanarConfiguration - 1
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - Adobe Photoshop CS3 Windows

reply to post by JibbyJedi

Listen, of course the space programs are not going to tell you they are testing biogens in space. If they did you would realize they do this by testing you. Collecting your minds electrical information, and studying all your moves and then controlling you is so when we are extinct the perfect biogen is here and is perfectly controlled by all those psychotronic satellite weapons.

i am not sure if i agree with the OP. but this is good photo learning experience for me that i did not know!
i think that NASA is hiding something just not sure what? even if the photos where real it is still not going to show
what the items really truly are! so i don't think it really matters.

reply to post by 1967sander


What a fantastic piece of work. I really like you comment your pictures. Cant wait for your next comment. Its nice someone with acces to such sofisticated computer programs.

Lets help you become a normal human being.... the answer to your question is .....


NO

Originally posted by libertybgordeal11
reply to post by JibbyJedi

 

Listen, of course the space programs are not going to tell you they are testing biogens in space. If they did you would realize they do this by testing you. Collecting your minds electrical information, and studying all your moves and then controlling you is so when we are extinct the perfect biogen is here and is perfectly controlled by all those psychotronic satellite weapons.

what are you babbling about? that sounds way out there even for one that is opend minded! i think the only true way to know what nasa is really doing is by working there in some way or form! then again i don't know every thing?

reply to post by NuminousCosmos


Sorry but again no solid proof as the original file "owner" easily can fake image data. The "owner" of the tif file can manipulate whatever he / she wants, than protect it with a password so no one else can. No file type is safe / excluded from manipulation. What can be made, can be changed, can be manipulated. There are plenty freeware applications and commercial applications that allow to complete file data manipulation. I have seen 500 Kb files that showed an original file size of 2 Mb, where a B/W suddenly was changed to RGB and other nice manipulations.

You will have to come up with some better proof.

Greetz,

Sander

reply to post by 1967sander


That's one of the reasons knowing where did you got the images you used is important.

Although it's not really possible to know if the images are closer to the originals than others, sometimes there are some clues that show that a photo is a copy of another but that was resized or altered for some reason, so even if we cannot trace the photo to its original source, we can (sometimes) recreate part of the image's history and see what kind of manipulation it has been subjected to.

reply to post by Chadwickus


You can call me whatever you want. I have just decided to simply ignore any of your comments in future. I joined this community to show my material to everyone who is interested and also to learn. I did not come here to harass someone I do not know anything about and most definitely do not want to call someone a liar. Some people try to provoke me, make me look bad and do not approach me in a polite manner. In future I will not reply to them and consider them as air. Everyone is entitled to his / her opinion, has his / her thoughts about certain things and all because we live in a free world.

So if I may have offended anyone in this forum, I sincerely apologize.

Greetz,

Sander