What's Your Beef With NASA?

oh and not to mention WHAT NASA SEES UP THERE confirmed by the NAVY smh. But you know we will play doom and gloom with the minds of the followers who disrespect the conspiracy theorist who seek TRUTH on their own, knowing there is more to this partial picture. AGAIN SECRETS...

SEE this type of mind gamery

NASA has, however, offered up a consolation prize for the 40th anniversary of the Apollo 11 mission — the agency has taken the best available broadcast television footage and contracted with a digital restoration firm to enhance it, so that the public can see the first moonwalk in more detail than ever before.

This is what I mean SO THE PUBLIC CAN SEE THE -HOLLYWOOD- VERSION IN MORE DETAIL

NASA knows what they do EVEN ON ATS

reply to post by nv4711


follow the evidence & question authority...



jokes re LGM doesn't cut it...

Allow me to sum up why I personally don't like NASA. They've been planing manned mission to mars since 1969 and when the finally sent something there , what was it? The Mars Rover. Now It's cool that they sent the mars rover there but it's nowhere's close to equaling a human being.

That they conduct what appears to be an exercise at finding out what went wrong with their Public Relations on a conspiracy site.

wEll you the get the best laughs from nasa , i think they are great . a space agency with no spaceships is bit lame, but i think we all all have more surprises in what we all learn , none of us really really know what the future actually might hold . it is good of nasa to share , but i hope they dont pull any more moonies in the near future not that they would get away with it these days . someone would kick their butts for them .

anyhow it is good to 1. forgive
and 2. forget

and 3. make good the future , before it is too late <

reply to post by nv4711


I love NASA. I don't think any of these things about them and get quite annoyed when people make comments like "Need another seven astronauts" or "Never a Straight Answer"

Originally posted by DJW001
Here's an actual color photo of the Moon, taken by myself a couple of months ago. Happy?

Thought not.

that the best you can do?

Quite frankly... that has to be the worst crappiest picture of the moon I have ever seen... why even bother?

:shk:

Here is a good example of NASA trickery.

This is the grey scale moon final product...



This is the original...



Now if you look closely at the finished product on the far right... you will see its not color correction... it is simply a sloppy over lay of a grey scale version



So yeah NASA DOES manipulate photos... and it IS on topic in a "Whats your Beef with NASA thread.

Personally I think you are just being deliberately obtuse...

As to color...

The US NAVY Clementine satellite did color Here is Reiner Gamma magnetic anomaly in all its glory. (This is the 10% scale version)



Mare Marginis, the magnetic anomaly on the opposite side (farside)



Here is Pegasus's photo of the moon. This is at 80% resolution... (the full 100% res is reserved for printing) Taken by my friend Mike Deegan in London. I have emails from NASA addresses that say its the best image of the moon they have seen

To big to paste into thread ...

www.thelivingmoon.com...

It shows us Aristarchus when the lights were on

reply to post by nv4711

So...what's your problem with NASA? Why do you think they're lying to the public and cover up their discoveries? You've got to help me out here, because I can't think of a single reason....

Here's 1 of the many reasons ....

Military Industrial Complex - Eisenhower 's warning



NASA is part of the MIC which means their transparency is just a public relations illusion

reply to post by mcrom901

it seems you didn't pay close attention to all the details mentioned in that last link... so i'll ask simply, what is the colour of the moon?

Based on my years of looking at it, I can tell you that it is grey. However, when viewed from sun angles only possible from near the lunar surface, it takes on a coppery sheen. Hang on... what color is water? Blue, right?



Now what color is water really? Is there some fakery here?

Originally posted by DJW001

Now what color is water really? Is there some fakery here?

edit on 10-11-2011 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)

And I thought the blue spectrum observing color was related to the blue sky, smh...

reply to post by nv4711


Great OP, I agree entirely. People always make threads bashing something said by NASA, but what they fail to realize is that they're some of the most experienced and credible people in those fields. Whenever there's a thread doubting the official word on a comet or asteroids path, I just think "Tell ya what, go to college, major in astrophysics, and do the calculations yourself if you don't trust NASA!"

smh

reply to post by zorgon

Quite frankly... that has to be the worst crappiest picture of the moon I have ever seen... why even bother?

You're just used to looking at the rubbish scans you base your nonsense on. You know perfectly well that Clementine took false color photos, and I know for a fact you know what that means. If they wanted to, they could have processed the images taken through different filters in dozens of different ways. Why must you try to mislead others? And who do you think are to you critique my photograph? At least I actually look at the Moon once in a while.

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by mcrom901

 

it seems you didn't pay close attention to all the details mentioned in that last link... so i'll ask simply, what is the colour of the moon?

Based on my years of looking at it, I can tell you that it is grey. However, when viewed from sun angles only possible from near the lunar surface, it takes on a coppery sheen.

what about from outside our own atmosphere?

reply to post by DJW001


Your water glass is a red herring... fill a huge aquarium with water and you will see the blue tint, even indoors where there is no sky.

Now stop playing the fool... people are not as dumb as you think

Originally posted by DJW001
You're just used to looking at the rubbish scans you base your nonsense on.

Well that moon photo I showed you is not a rubbish scan it was taken with a 10 inch scope in London...

You know perfectly well that Clementine took false color photos, and I know for a fact you know what that means.

VISIBLE LIGHT [Normal Light]

High-Resolution Camera

This 1.1-kg camera operates at visible wavelengths (0.415 to 0.75 µm) with silicon CCD technology combined with a compact, lightweight image intensifier.

To provide reliable, solid-state, cost-effective imaging in the near ultraviolet,
visible, and near-infrared regions of the spectrum (from 0.3 to 1.0 µm), LLNL designed and built a medium-resolution, 0.426-kg camera that uses silicon charge-coupled device
(CCD) technology. For Clementine, this camera was combined with a six position spectral filter wheel for remote sensing applications and, specifically, for mineral typing studies of the Moon. The image below shows the African continent imaged by the ultraviolet/visible camera at five different wavelengths on a clear day from a distance of 384,000 km.

This is a true color image taken by that Clementine camera from the trip to the moon



That data is directly from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
www.llnl.gov...

You continue to play ostrich and use selective reasoning to push your agenda Some images from clementine are enhanced with a little IR and UV but they are still taken in visible light range first

Now NASA took that image of earth above, the true color one, and did THIS with it

And who do you think are to you critique my photograph?

Who do I have to be to recognize junk?

Originally posted by mcrom901
reply to post by nv4711

 

follow the evidence & question authority...



jokes re LGM doesn't cut it...

And this is evidence of exactly what? This is supposed to be evidence of a cover up?

What I read is a General, asking the Information Officer for the boiler plate statement on UFOs...
Why? Well, for one thing because he knows that whatever he says will be taken out of context and end up on sites like this as "proof" that an Air Force General confirmed UFOs..

The next paragraph is the Information Officer expressing his hope that there won't be another UFO investigation....
Because he's concerned that the gig is up?.. Will people find out?.... No.. the simple and logical explanation is
because he does not want again to spend money and manpower on a Fata Morgana, knowing that there is nothing to investigate...and of course knowing that if they did an investigation the result won't be accepted anyways....
"The investigation has not uncovered any credible fact or evidence for alien craft and/or alien beings visiting Earth"........Response:.."liars"...."Cover Up".... so, why even bother?

This letter is a simple office action and given that this letter that you offer as evidence of a cover up isn't even classified is just a side note...

Originally posted by JimOberg

Originally posted by 1questioner
reply to post by nv4711

 

Ummm...let's see if I can think of one beef... Oh yeah, how about losing or destroying all the original video footage shot on the moon by the Apollo 11 astronauts.

Either NASA is lying about that (Which is what I suspect.), or they are the most incompetent government agency in the history of mankind!

It's no mystery to me why people distrust NASA.

There is a third possibility you should open your mind to.

Your mind is full of delusional, malicious fantasies.

First, the astronauts never shot 'video footage' on the Moon. They had one still camera, and a 16-mm cine camera set up in the LM window, running automatically -- whose images still exist and are fully available.

Second, no scenes from ANYWHERE are gone -- all televised video recorded during live transmission exists and is available.

SOME sequences of the live TV during the initial crew descent to the surface were recorded both at the receiving site in Australia, and then converted live to US TV format and rebroadcast there immediately -- and recorded, permanently and openly.

The original signal was recorded, and folks there recall it looked sharper than the converted images. THOSE recordings came up missing. But these are the same activities ALSO observed by the 16-mm cine camera, which showed them in even GREATER detail than either TV format.

The reality here differs greatly from common myths. Make this a 'teachanble moment' and dispel delusions that have polluted your mind.

None of this substracts from possible substantive criticisms of NASA.

Then, of course, there's THIS idiot:

Originally posted by Pimander
There are leaks and whistleblowers occasionally. Then there is a campaign to discredit the whistleblower or evidence. Then you all forget again.

Did you believe them when they claimed to "lose" the original Apollo 11 landing tapes? Would even an idiot do that? Would even an idiot believe they were "lost"? Not this idiot.

edit on 10-11-2011 by JimOberg because: add this idiot

Mr. Oberg, is it a delusional and malicious fantasy when NASA admits it lost video footage?

"When we sent our camera up on the mission, everything about it was a first and a big unknown," said Richard Nafzger, an engineer with NASA who was involved in the original transmission of the Apollo 11 images to Earth and is now part of the search to find them. "Would the camera work? Would we get TV of that first step? We just didn't know what to expect.

"In the same way, we're doing a kind of massive tape and document search that's never been done before," Nafzger said in a recent interview. "We might discover the tapes tomorrow, or we might reach a point where we have to say we can't go any further. Right now, I would have to tell you their fate is pretty much a mystery."

Full link to the Washington Post article:
www.washingtonpost.com...

It should be beneath you to call other ATS members names. If you are a true professional, you should have the ability to keep the level of discourse high. Please do so in the future.

Originally posted by Reptius
Allow me to sum up why I personally don't like NASA. They've been planing manned mission to mars since 1969 and when the finally sent something there , what was it? The Mars Rover. Now It's cool that they sent the mars rover there but it's nowhere's close to equaling a human being.

Yes, true.. but there are so many formidable challenges to overcome to send humans to Mars, from funding to ethics (might be a one way mission...who's gonna volunteer for that...). Robots are just cheaper and can basically do the same things... Yet, I agree it's not the same and a human mission would be the real deal...

Originally posted by mcrom901
what about from outside our own atmosphere?

Oh that is easy...

There is a little known image taken by Galileo on its way to Jupiter... You know... the spacecraft that gave us all those TRUE COLOR beautiful images of Jupiter and Io?


Image Credit: NASA/JPL/Galileo Spacecraft

OOOOOOOOO PRETTY !!!!!



To bad that doesn't get around much

And what is really cool is that Galileo also was lucky and caught Aristarchus with the lights on...







So did Clementine...



Even though the lights dimmed when Clementine flew over...

"A satisfying rebuke to the TLP naysayers was recently delivered by JPL's B. Buratti at the October 1999 meeting of the American Astronomical Society in Padua, Italy. Her specific TLP occurred on April 23, 1994. At that time, about one hundred amateur astronomers noticed a 40-minute darkening near the edge of the bright lunar crater Aristarchus. Happily, when this hundred fold "illusion" took place, the lunar satellite Clementine was mapping the area around Aristarchus. Defying the dogmatists, Buratti scrutinized the Clementine data again. Sure enough, Aristarchus had really turned redder after the TLP reported by the amateur astronomers."

www.science-frontiers.com...

Another astronomer caught Aristarchus with the lights on... Anthony Jenkins... on the same date as Mike Deegan got his images



And here he is with Sir Patrick Moore going over that image



Aristarchus Crater
Apollo 11 Transcript from Mission Log



So is Aristarchus really blue?













Yup seems like it is