Do these manipulated Apollo images hide an unknown civilization?

page: 2
240
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Swills
 



He used some bad ass software, AMS auto multi layer segmentation software, on these photos, and most of, if not all of us do not have access to such software.


Oh....how "convenient" for the OP.


Now then....who can tell us what kind of image manipulation software was available in 1969, 1970, 1971.....etc?

Surely, for any organization committed to *hiding evidence* from Apollo photos that date from the actual historical records and time-frame, they would have had to have very sophisticated computer processing abilities in the 1970s?? I seem to have miss that tidbit from the historical records of the era.

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.

Wow! What skilled and genius professionals, hiding all those skills for so many decades.


IF what is said is true about the govt having technology hidden in the wings 50 years superior than what is used commercially, is it out of the relm of possibility that that also applied to computer tech?

Im not disagreeing with you. Im just asking the question. Im more interested in the software the op used to see the anomolies. I guess im just not sure what is so special about it, and that this isnt just Hoaglandesque.
edit on 26-10-2011 by amongus because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 01:48 AM
link   
Interesting, but what happens if you do the same with any
EARTHLY picture..Let say a House or a cat or a mirror....

Do that and show the results, IF you dare.....
edit on 2011/10/26 by Miccey because: (no reason given)


+28 more 
posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Swills
 



He used some bad ass software, AMS auto multi layer segmentation software, on these photos, and most of, if not all of us do not have access to such software.


Oh....how "convenient" for the OP.


Now then....who can tell us what kind of image manipulation software was available in 1969, 1970, 1971.....etc?

Surely, for any organization committed to *hiding evidence* from Apollo photos that date from the actual historical records and time-frame, they would have had to have very sophisticated computer processing abilities in the 1970s?? I seem to have miss that tidbit from the historical records of the era.

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.

Wow! What skilled and genius professionals, hiding all those skills for so many decades.


Yes yes, you can pull the old "how convenient" argument, but that means you're calling this guy a liar, fraud, hoaxer, etc. Because he clearly states what type of software he uses, who uses it (micro biologists), and that you won't be buying from Best Buy. So by your logic this should be an easy case to solve because either the man is lying or telling the truth, and from watching that video and seeing the software being used in action, I believe him.

You have a nasty attitude, just so you know.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Of course running the same software with the same photos by a different party is the way to verify his findings. Thing is, he didn't use any old photo software to check these photos out. He used some bad ass software, AMS auto multi layer segmentation software, on these photos, and most of, if not all of us do not have access to such software. Although, this is ATS and all, I'm sure someone out there may have access to similar software or the like. Hopefully they'll find this thread.


edit on 26-10-2011 by Swills because: (no reason given)


I haven't looked at the video but ...

It doesn't really matter what software the OP is using. A low band pass in Matlab is the same as low band pass done using C++ or Photoshop (if done correctly) or any other image editing app or language that can do image engineer operations.

If the OP provided the methods and functions used etc ... persons could replicate the results in a large number of applications of their choosing. Without that information it's all a bit of anomalous guess work.

P.S - a lot of the 'high end' or 'bad ass' applications actually specifically log this information so it can be exported when used correctly!
edit on 26-10-2011 by Pinke because: PS



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 01:52 AM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Don't you think if Gates and Wozniak and Jobs, were writing files to photoshop the images they wouldn't leave behind any sloppy evidence? These are photos from the internet too, scanned.

So you are saying published photos in Time Magazine or on television in the 60's couldn't be photoshopped or altered?

Photo Manipulation

Darkroom Manipulation



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 01:53 AM
link   
reply to post by 1967sander
 


Awesome example of technology proving fact over fiction. It is pretty sad that once again, all these years, we are still being played by our "government". You just have to wonder......have they EVER been honest and "for" the people. IMHO in the early 1950's, when the American government began covert drug testing on our soldiers, was when the beginning of the separation of the government representing it's people.
edit on 26-10-2011 by Gridrebel because:


+1 more 
posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by amongus
Op, can you please provide more info on the software used in this video?

Im intrigued.....another poster nailed it by saying for you to use the software on a everyday photo you took. Are there normal explainations for the anomolies you found?



He did use the software on a NASA photo that had no manipulations and then showed photos that did. So that should answer that question, unless you wanna see it compare to other photos that are non-NASA.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pinke

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Of course running the same software with the same photos by a different party is the way to verify his findings. Thing is, he didn't use any old photo software to check these photos out. He used some bad ass software, AMS auto multi layer segmentation software, on these photos, and most of, if not all of us do not have access to such software. Although, this is ATS and all, I'm sure someone out there may have access to similar software or the like. Hopefully they'll find this thread.


edit on 26-10-2011 by Swills because: (no reason given)


I haven't looked at the video but ...

It doesn't really matter what software the OP is using. A low band pass in Matlab is the same as low band pass done using C++ or Photoshop (if done correctly) or any other image editing app or language that can do image engineer operations.

If the OP provided the methods and functions used etc ... persons could replicate the results in a large number of applications of their choosing. Without that information it's all a bit of anomalous guess work.

P.S - a lot of the 'high end' or 'bad ass' applications actually specifically log this information so it can be exported when used correctly!
edit on 26-10-2011 by Pinke because: PS


Well then if the software doesn't matter it should be easy for anyone to do this. I will definitely be checking up on this thread to hear what the OP uses and to see if we can use similar software to produce similar results.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills

Originally posted by amongus
Op, can you please provide more info on the software used in this video?

Im intrigued.....another poster nailed it by saying for you to use the software on a everyday photo you took. Are there normal explainations for the anomolies you found?



He did use the software on a NASA photo that had no manipulations and then showed photos that did. So that should answer that question, unless you wanna see it compare to other photos that are non-NASA.


I want to see the software he used on a photo he took, in the same lighting situation. I know you cant replicate the moons lighting (unless you are on a movie set....ZING!). But lets see someone on here use the same software the op used on an everyday pic.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by amongus
 


Like the OP said, the software he was using is not cheap. I'm pretty sure the software would cost several thousand dollars. It's not a free for all or anything like photoshop. Maybe he the OP could identify the name of the software again for those who missed it in the video. Then the doubters could purchase the software, obtain original NASA photos and try this disclosure technique for themselves.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 02:06 AM
link   
I too want to see the software because I googled it, and could not find anything. I did find this:

Censorship of images in the Soviet Union

Censorship of images in the Soviet Union

Multiple examples of photos being touched up and altered in the 1930's and 40's.





posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 02:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gridrebel
reply to post by amongus
 


Like the OP said, the software he was using is not cheap. I'm pretty sure the software would cost several thousand dollars. It's not a free for all or anything like photoshop. Maybe he the OP could identify the name of the software again for those who missed it in the video. Then the doubters could purchase the software, obtain original NASA photos and try this disclosure technique for themselves.


Thats what im asking for...what is the name of it, and how is the processing special. I dont give a snip that the op claims that is expensive......expensive software can be buggy just like anything else.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 02:09 AM
link   
Side note...you would think with all the NASA layoffs, cutting of funds, that SOMEONE would want to be a hero, and spill the beans......if anything is indeed going on...

Yet nothing......



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Of course running the same software with the same photos by a different party is the way to verify his findings. Thing is, he didn't use any old photo software to check these photos out. He used some bad ass software, AMS auto multi layer segmentation software, on these photos, and most of, if not all of us do not have access to such software. Although, this is ATS and all, I'm sure someone out there may have access to similar software or the like. Hopefully they'll find this thread.

On a side note, do yourselves a favor and check out his other videos!


Hi there! Perhaps my eyes are playing tricks on me but I really thought to have seen spacecritters flying and crawling around INSIDE the ISS! Do we have alien lifeforms / critters visiting the ISS? Why don't you take a peek and convince yourselves. As soon as the astronaut has disappeared the show starts.


edit on 26-10-2011 by Swills because: (no reason given)


Amazing vid by the way...star worthy!

Let me ask you this....since you believe these are space critters, do you believe the OP's investigation?

Which I have to applaud him for....even if there is a normal explaination for it....


+5 more 
posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 02:22 AM
link   
Carefully watching this video and seeing how this software exposes obvious and sometimes subtle attempts at manipulation, it is just so smooth, like a truly masterful bit of software engineering..

To have have such fine controls that the average person or even seasoned graphics artists would not usually get to see or use, (because an artist would not usually need it) and then applying it in forensic use to our beloved nasa images has really made my day quite happy, thank you very much:


What is even more entertaining is to see the horrific and embarrasing attempt by some debunker to try and rubbish this entire showcase of damning evidence against NASA... This figuratively catches them with their hand completely stuck in the cookie jar, and not even those life saws that the fire department uses sometimes will help them get out... (okay, maybe I'm taking this a bit too far... time to sleep)

Reminds me of the famous quote about truth first being violently opposed, then......you know the one...

I can't even find the words to express what seeing this video, and this software in action has made me feel...



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 02:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienreality
Carefully watching this video and seeing how this software exposes obvious and sometimes subtle attempts at manipulation, it is just so smooth, like a truly masterful bit of software engineering..

To have have such fine controls that the average person or even seasoned graphics artists would not usually get to see or use, (because an artist would not usually need it) and then applying it in forensic use to our beloved nasa images has really made my day quite happy, thank you very much:


What is even more entertaining is to see the horrific and embarrasing attempt by some debunker to try and rubbish this entire showcase of damning evidence against NASA... This figuratively catches them with their hand completely stuck in the cookie jar, and not even those life saws that the fire department uses sometimes will help them get out... (okay, maybe I'm taking this a bit too far... time to sleep)

Reminds me of the famous quote about truth first being violently opposed, then......you know the one...

I can't even find the words to express what seeing this video, and this software in action has made me feel...


Its called "deny ignorance.". Look into it. It should sound familure.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 02:44 AM
link   
People should watch the video before trying to post their awful opinions.

Thanks for giving us something different to look at here for a change, sick of all the boring YouTube UFO videos of complete crap that gets posted every day.

S+F



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 03:04 AM
link   
For those that are insisting on proof of legitimacy........ DO IT YOURSELF!

You are the accuser, the burden of proof is on you.

Jeez.....................

Anyway, thought the video was compelling. Would love to see more!



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 03:13 AM
link   
OMG is this guy serious? He is analyzing jpg compressed images for manipulation. Depending on the quantization matrix he could see anything he wants in this pics. And then there is also the issue with digitalization of the original photos which will add artifacts on its own. Crap in, crap out.



posted on Oct, 26 2011 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by azbowhunter
For those that are insisting on proof of legitimacy........ DO IT YOURSELF!

You are the accuser, the burden of proof is on you.

Jeez.....................

Anyway, thought the video was compelling. Would love to see more!


You do read replies, right? Right?

All we are asking for is an explaination of the software used....

Epic fail @ do it yourselves. Cmon.





new topics

top topics



 
240
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join