Lunar photo-enhancements reveal alien civilization evidence.

page: 23
19
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by gort51
 




Too many questions, not enough answers.


Every one of those "questions" has an answer. Some of the "questions" are also not really valid anyway, since they are based on misconceptions in some way or another.

But, if someone cannot comprehend how a planetary body like the Moon, that has existed for over 4 1/2 Billion years, can come to have all the features we see, then I wonder if it's even possible to explain it here on ATS, in such a Forum.


Quite true.
As I said, Too many questions, not enough answers.....




posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by gort51
 


What the schools don't teach in class anymore (I presume) can be found on Google just by typing in your questions. For instance a 3 second search brought this site up.


Solar Storms Could 'Sandblast' the Moon

www.nasa.gov...

I love the internet, it is so much easier than going to the library use to be and a lot faster than scanning book after book. Ask and you shall receive now days, isn't it grand?
edit on 8-12-2011 by dcmb1409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2011 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by dcmb1409
 


Thanks for the link.......Note:....COULD, implies Maybe, or really...we dont know.

Coulda, woulda, shoulda........just another postulation by scientists that dont really have a clue.

But a nice try.



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by arianna
I offer no explanation text as the features showing in the image are sufficient.
So, when you said "In future, I will apply text to some of the images indicating what I see" you were only bluffing, or did you change your mind?


No ArMaP, I was not bluffing and have not changed my mind. With regards to the last image which shows many of the anthropological shapes spotted at this one particular location, where could I have placed the text? There is no room on the image to place any text as the whole image is saturated with the highlighting. Some members will probably feel the amount of highlighting I have applied is bordering on the ridiculous, but there is a reason for this. The image posted is a reference image and as I have previously said, these anthropological shapes appear to form part of the structures. Therefore, as there is a large number of shapes showing which, according to the scientific world should not be seen at all, gives us a good idea of the resident's artistic concepts, what they look like and a reasonable indication as to the number of structures. The next image will show some of the structures with text.



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   
What real scientisit say about that image and about the boulders on the moon. Also shows some close ups of lunar boulders and their shapes.

www.universetoday.com...

www.universetoday.com...

www.vias.org...

www.spaceref.com...

www.scienceresourceworld.com...

apod.nasa.gov...

www.moonzoo.org...

lroc.sese.asu.edu.../archives/465-Perched-boulders.html

www.nasa.gov...

www.moonviews.com...

www.lpi.usra.edu...



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Following on from the previous image, this is the same view with arrows pointing to some of the groups of structures. If you examine the image you will find the whole view is full of structures and anthropological shapes. The viewpoint is some distance above the surface. I have also arrowed what would appear to be large pipes.

This image is a touch sharper than the previous image as I have slightly improved the edge definition.




Direct link. i985.photobucket.com...



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by arianna
No ArMaP, I was not bluffing and have not changed my mind.
OK.



With regards to the last image which shows many of the anthropological shapes spotted at this one particular location, where could I have placed the text?
You could have only used part of the image, with the text covering the rest.


Therefore, as there is a large number of shapes showing which, according to the scientific world should not be seen at all, gives us a good idea of the resident's artistic concepts, what they look like and a reasonable indication as to the number of structures.
Even if the structures are real and artificial, you are letting your imagination take over when you talk about things like "residents", or do you see any signs of those structures being inhabited?



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 


At last, some indications of what you have been talking about. Just looking at the areas pointed by the arrows I start to see a pattern, so I guess I am starting to understand what you consider structures, although I don't see them as that myself.

Some people paint over what they see in a different colour, so other people can see the shapes as they see them, so could you do that also? It would be even better than the arrows.

Thanks in advance.



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 


Could you please explain just one, or two of where those many "arrows" are pointing?

Because, for the life of me, each "ARROW" points to....well, nothing at all.


The "arrows" are labeled as pointing at "structures" but.....they only 'point' to natural features.

Much confusion....(??)



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:41 PM
link   
The white dots and squares are structures DUH



posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by arianna
 


Could you please explain just one, or two of where those many "arrows" are pointing?

Because, for the life of me, each "ARROW" points to....well, nothing at all.


The "arrows" are labeled as pointing at "structures" but.....they only 'point' to natural features.

Much confusion....(??)



I can assure you that the arrows are definitely pointing to artificial features.

With many of the enhanced lunar images from this area one has to concentrate for a while on the content before the shapes and objects become apparent.

I will try and process some close-up views of the features from this image.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   


one has to concentrate for a while on the content before the shapes and objects become apparent.


You have got to be kidding. I know of no school, institution, or agency that would teach nor accept such technique as a professional way to interpret data in most any form for a client. Stare at anything long enough and all kind of things become apparent between the eye and brain connection.

I'm confused as to the logic behind the above quote. In the real world are you saying that satellite images have to be corrupted and stared at for a while so the processor can identify any ground object of interest?

I want a job in the room where you sit and stare at images for a while and make assumptions of what you see and then get recognized and highly paid for this guess work.

I have an uneasy feeling someone is having a good time at everyone's expense.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by dcmb1409



one has to concentrate for a while on the content before the shapes and objects become apparent.


You have got to be kidding. I know of no school, institution, or agency that would teach nor accept such technique as a professional way to interpret data in most any form for a client. Stare at anything long enough and all kind of things become apparent between the eye and brain connection.

I'm confused as to the logic behind the above quote. In the real world are you saying that satellite images have to be corrupted and stared at for a while so the processor can identify any ground object of interest?

I want a job in the room where you sit and stare at images for a while and make assumptions of what you see and then get recognized and highly paid for this guess work.

I have an uneasy feeling someone is having a good time at everyone's expense.



Definitely not! This photographic study couldn't be more serious.

Take a look at the close-up set of images below and comment on what you see.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 08:51 AM
link   
The main image was rotated 40 degrees to the left and a section selected for cropping. Three versions of the same crop are shown and each has a different level of brightness. The areas where there are signs of structures I have ringed with an ellipse.



Direct view. i985.photobucket.com...




Direct view. i985.photobucket.com...




Direct view. i985.photobucket.com...



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 08:53 AM
link   
Hi Arianna,

I was just curious and wanted to ask you what the scale is in the image with all the arrows pointing to the artificial objects to help give me a better perspective. In particular, I am wondering what the potential diameter of those large pipes may be. Is the scale of the picture such that those large pipes are 1 foot in diameter, 100 feet in diameter, 1000 feet in diameter, or 10,000 feet in diameter?

You don't have to tell me the exact scale of your enhanced image if you do not want to share that, but please let me know what ball park the scale of the picture is in to help get a better perspective of those objects.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by IronDogg
Hi Arianna,

I was just curious and wanted to ask you what the scale is in the image with all the arrows pointing to the artificial objects to help give me a better perspective. In particular, I am wondering what the potential diameter of those large pipes may be. Is the scale of the picture such that those large pipes are 1 foot in diameter, 100 feet in diameter, 1000 feet in diameter, or 10,000 feet in diameter?

You don't have to tell me the exact scale of your enhanced image if you do not want to share that, but please let me know what ball park the scale of the picture is in to help get a better perspective of those objects.


The image in question was cropped from the downloaded original then resized to 1000 pixels wide.

The resolution for the image is approximately 0.56m/pixel.
edit on 10-12-2011 by arianna because: text



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 09:47 AM
link   
looks like a bunch of lines too me TS

i dont see no buildings n'#



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 



The resolution for the image is approximately 0.56m/pixel.


So, roughly 1/2 meter per pixel. At that resolution, any artificial constructs should be obvious, and immediately apparent to everyone who views the images.

Not just to one person.

Compare that resolution to other photos of Earth, and it's perfectly obvious.

Look at these photos from the Moon, and yes this time they actually do show "structures", and not just the natural features:

blogs.discovermagazine.com...


Look at this image in particular, then at the text describing it:


....but it looks to me that when they walked to the Surveyor site, they went one way around that small (6 meter/20 foot) pit, and when they came back they went around the other way.


Do you see what the author described as a "pit"? It is a crater, actually. But, you can see the relative size it's described as being, about 6 meters diameter. It is clearly evident, isn't it?

Now....in your example photos, where are the "obvious structures"? One should not need to "squint", nor "stare at it" for any length of time....these so-called "structures" should pop out to the eye, instantly. If they exist, that is.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


I'm sorryProudBird but it would seem you are not exploring the images hard enough. You have to concentrate on a particular part of the image for a while to see if anything is recognizable or appears to make sense make. It's not easy when one is dealing with images that give the impression of being obfuscated somewhere along the line. You cannot compare the views shown here with hi-res images. But don't worry, there's a host of artificial evidence on the lunar surface just waiting to be found. Research is in progress at the present time to develop a procedure that may help to improve the quality of the enhanced images so that better identification of the surface features can be achieved.



posted on Dec, 10 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by arianna
You have to concentrate on a particular part of the image for a while to see if anything is recognizable or appears to make sense make.
Rocks and craters make sense.



It's not easy when one is dealing with images that give the impression of being obfuscated somewhere along the line.
But they do not give that impression to all people, what do you see that gives you that impression?


You cannot compare the views shown here with hi-res images.
The images you posted are all based on high resolution images, so why do you say that?


But don't worry, there's a host of artificial evidence on the lunar surface just waiting to be found.
How do you know?


Research is in progress at the present time to develop a procedure that may help to improve the quality of the enhanced images so that better identification of the surface features can be achieved.
Just do not over do it.





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 20  21  22    24  25  26 >>

log in

join