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.

 

We should scour the moon for ancient traces of aliens, say scientists

page: 9
41
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 



This is your fairy tale from long long time my dear... a Fairy tale.

On Google there are real images like other. Who Manipulate the image? Google Team? IMPOSSIBLE. And The "zoom" cant distort a lot if there is an anomaly. Who manipulate the original images LPI, JPL? LROC ?


Please stop flaunting your, er, lack of research skills. Learn to understand how to use your tools:

www.google.com...

I suggest you e-mail your questions to the following:

google_moon@google.com




posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 01:40 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 

The source images Google Earth uses are fine.

It's what Google Earth (or Google Moon or Google Mars) does with them when it uses algorithms to process the images that creates the problem.

You can go check out these bridges yourself and see they look fine on the images Google Earth started with, and as you can see, Google Earth distorted them significantly in algorithm processing:

Collapsed bridge:
www.loshombres.org...



The blue trace is my GPS recorded path - and indicates the bridge over the American River canyon - on the image it looks like it collapsed though.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


Typical Google Earth distortion.





That's not how it is!



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by K-PAX-PROT
 

You are correct.
However some people seem to think that Google Moon is a valid "tool".



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Hoarding better images doesn't help those that don't have access to them does it ?



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
even if they found evidence of ETs on the moon, there would still be people that say it is a hoax or proof of a past human civilization that done it. or my personal favorate 'gods testing us'



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by watchdog8110
 


Help them for what? I'm at a loss here.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by watchdog8110
 


Help them for what? I'm at a loss here.


I respect your asking the que , thats your right .

Donna Hare and the association with the disclosure group , tampered images for one . By her coming forth and all . I am not going to call her a lair , far from it . The whole disclosure group and the press conference . If Nasa/Gov wants to keep under lock and key images thats fine from their perspective .

There is no national security issue with releasing ALL images of the MOON is there ? What would the moon have with that ? Same can be asked of all space agencies .
edit on 30-12-2011 by watchdog8110 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Looks promising. I completely agree. Day by day I'm becoming more and more convinced that we've had some sort of closer encounter(s) in the past. The moon is a good place to check thoroughly.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by watchdog8110
 


How can you prove to a rational mind tampering of images and not intervention of image processing took place. There is a difference.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage


Okay so I didn't expect YOU to resort to such cheap shots at the scientists on the team...

It is exactly nit picking like this that shows me ATS has lost its value...

Go ahead knock yourself out... you will likely get many stars... but you are starting to sound like a desperate fool




posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 06:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
They don't accept applications from people who use Google Moon


Perhaps not... but I am 100% sure they don't even look at applications from those who see 'nothing but blurry rocks'




posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


And spoil all of your flags?!!

One would think you'd want to minimize reason. Accolades here would drop with logic and proof.

You do spin a nice web. Spin on.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by watchdog8110
 


How can you prove to a rational mind tampering of images and not intervention of image processing took place. There is a difference.


Intervention for what purpose ? I see a tap dance happening with semantics .



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Illustronic
And spoil all of your flags?!!


Flags have no value whatsoever... all they do is show your age


And even a million stars won't get you even a free ATS hat


What does work is talking to the scientists, especially the ones that visit my website


Trust me that is a LOT more satisfying than rehashing the same old arguments with the deliberately blind and the obtuse



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 

Correcting an incorrect statement is a cheap shot? I thought that's what we're supposed to do here.

Why did you say this?


And it is those very LROC scientists that are making the statement that we should be LOOKING and recruiting people to hunt.

Which LROC scientists? Just an innocent error? An assumption? Or did you mean the ones that are visiting your website?



but you are starting to sound like a desperate fool

Who's the fool? Someone who makes an invalid claim or those who accept it along with the veiled implications?
Of course, we never see any veiled (and unsubstantiated) implications here... do we?
edit on 12/30/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 12/30/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Which LROC scientists? Just an innocent error? An assumption?


This one for one... As far as I am concerned a 'Research Technician' at LROC is a scientist. He may not hold a doctorate but he IS an official team member listed as STAFF... so who the hell are YOU to tell us he isn't a scientist?


Of course, we never see any veiled (and unsubstantiated) implications here... do we?


Your right so here is your substantiated implication, direct from the NASA/ASU LROC team page under 'STAFF'



Now go suck eggnog



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


You have no idea who I work with or what I do for a living, which affords me zero time to support a BLOG!. Or anyone I'm associated with professionally. I just call crap when it stinks like crap. And I know when I go to bed each night I can sleep.

Do you need an alarm clock to get up in time to go back to work (if you in fact have to work), I haven't in over 25 years, I just get up.



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Seriously what do you get out of pushing speculations? Does it feed the wife and kids? Keep you and yours heathy? What is the point? What is the purpose? Are you one of those smarter than Einstein electrically Tesla and such or something?

Explains employment likely.



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join