Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Tower on the Moon filmed by amateur

page: 3
79
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
Soylent Green is exactly correct; it is a mountain standing out on the darkened floor of a crater. The Moon's terminator is a jumble of light and shadow. The Earth's atmosphere causes that swarming effect for the same reason that stars twinkle. The shadowy "tower" is a mirage caused by unsteady atmospheric conditions. In time, as he gets familiar with his telescope, he will no longer be puzzled by phenomena like this.


I think you're right about this video. The tower is an illusion created by the play of light and shadow however...

The Lunar Orbiter photographed an amazing spire that towers 5 miles over the surrounding surface of the moon.



edit on 18-1-2012 by Blarneystoner because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   
How about its a giant tower, how about that???

its not like it hasn't been discussed before by an honest man who worked for the air force that happened to have seen them on nasa film
edit on 18-1-2012 by sweetnlow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
I do not think a Celestion 130 is capable of imaging the horizon of the moon at such detail. HOAX!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
I do not think a Celestion 130 is capable of imaging the horizon of the moon at such detail. HOAX!


You're right it can't.

As I said I have a more powerful scope and I certainly can't see that detail.
Also with such magnification, any slight
Jerky movement would be amplified massively. You just
couldn't film it.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
I do not think a Celestion 130 is capable of imaging the horizon of the moon at such detail. HOAX!


Don't be so quick declaring something as Hoax just because you 'think' it can't be done
He had a camcorder with zoom behind that, too you know..




You're right it can't.

As I said I have a more powerful scope and I certainly can't see that detail.
Also with such magnification, any slight
Jerky movement would be amplified massively. You just
couldn't film it.


Well maybe he knows a thing or two more than you do. He gave perfect explanation as to what he did to be able to get this recorded


"Filmed January 5, 2012 @ 7 pm ....Tall water tower looking structure on the horizon of the moon. 4 clips in one. I filmed this using a celestron 130 telescope and a panasonic camcorder."

More specfic..."panasonic 78x zoom camcorder. i was optical zoomed at about 30. I used an 18mm eyepiece with a 2x barlow lense on the telescope"
edit on 18-1-2012 by Hellas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
I do not think a Celestion 130 is capable of imaging the horizon of the moon at such detail. HOAX!


I agree. A celestron 130 is a $500 telescope. There is no way it could get as close as this shows. Nobody shoul;d be drinking this Kool Aid.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by nineix
 


cool!
now i know how to fake my own moon video!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler

Originally posted by groingrinder
I do not think a Celestion 130 is capable of imaging the horizon of the moon at such detail. HOAX!


I agree. A celestron 130 is a $500 telescope. There is no way it could get as close as this shows. Nobody shoul;d be drinking this Kool Aid.


Except that he claims he was using optical zoom from the camcorder as well. The image quality was not great. I'm not familiar with what result he would get from his set up, but also not ready to dismiss it based on other telescope images with different set ups.

For reference, here is a Celestron C8 with 7x optical zoom on the imaging device.

-Youtube link redacted- On account of me not paying attention to detail



edit on 18-1-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)
edit on 18-1-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho

Originally posted by schuyler

Originally posted by groingrinder
I do not think a Celestion 130 is capable of imaging the horizon of the moon at such detail. HOAX!


I agree. A celestron 130 is a $500 telescope. There is no way it could get as close as this shows. Nobody shoul;d be drinking this Kool Aid.


Except that he claims he was using optical zoom from the camcorder as well. The image quality was not great. I'm not familiar with what result he would get from his set up, but also not ready to dismiss it based on other telescope images with different set ups.

For reference, here is a Celestron C8 with 7x optical zoom on the imaging device.

edit on 18-1-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)


A celestron 130 costs £120
A celestron c8 costs £1300

You can't do what a c8 does with a 130 - FACT

I have spent many hours out in the cold with my telescope and I am telling you,
Even with a 2*barlow and video camera with optical zoom,
There is no way you could see that close and that steady.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by gortex
Whatever IT is IT has been filmed by someone else too .

Judging by the long shot at the end of the video (about 4.16) it's massive
edit on 18-1-2012 by gortex because: Edit to add


Really, really impressive.

Stars for you gortex.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Hellas
 


Well... I clicked on this thread and expected to roll my eyes like I do at most of these "moon tower" threads, but I have to give you credit for this one. Whatever that is, it's interesting! Anyone have any idea how tall that would be? Would have to be pretty ginormous to stand out like that!

Also, I'm in agreement with the poster who mentioned G.I. Joe characters and dinosaurs, LOL! That's exactly what I thought, even before I read his post!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoSocialist
 


My mistake.

I didn't notice the difference between the two while I was searching.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho

Except that he claims he was using optical zoom from the camcorder as well. The image quality was not great. I'm not familiar with what result he would get from his set up, but also not ready to dismiss it based on other telescope images with different set ups.

For reference, here is a Celestron C8 with 7x optical zoom on the imaging device.


Forgive me, but I don't understand your reasoning. You say you are "not ready to dismiss it based on other telescope images with different set ups" then turn right around and reference a C8 with 7x optical zoom, which is a completely different telescope. Incidentally, a C8 is a far better (and much more expensive) telescope than the $500 toy used by this person.

Secondly, the video looks as if the pictures are taken from the moon's surface or at least close. they are at an angle. If he were using a telescope from Earth, the view would be from the top down.

EDIT: I'm sorry. I see you replied to that issue. I must have been composing my post as you answered.
edit on 1/18/2012 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   


Secondly, the video looks as if the pictures are taken from the moon's surface or at least close. they are at an angle. If he were using a telescope from Earth, the view would be from the top down.


Maybe because he's filming the top horizon and not the front face??

It's a sphere and not flat
edit on 18-1-2012 by Hellas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


I noticed the angle as well. Which seemed odd. I also searched to see if I could find a closer set up but the only hits I found were the original posters channel.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
I have a 12" Dobsonian (FL=1500mm, f/4.93) and can most certainly get shots like the video in the original post - even with an unzoomed cell phone camera! (using a 2" 16mm 100 degree wide field barlowed at 2X). Even closer if I use my 8mm barlowed 2X)

I have never tried looking through a telescope like the original poster, so I cannot comment on that. But a 12" reflector can get the equivalent - no problem.

Since the poster of that video gave us the details such as date and time, I will be able to match the next phase and see if I can find it myself. Most likely it is a play of shadows. I look at the moon mid phase all the time and you get some wonderful sights looking at the border between light and dark. I have even caught some rare "flashes" on the surface of the moon, twice.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Adaven
 


That's more than twice the size of his telescope though!!

Sorry, I don't buy it.
edit on 18-1-2012 by NeoSocialist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Adaven I look at the moon mid phase all the time and you get some wonderful sights looking at the border between light and dark. I have even caught some rare "flashes" on the surface of the moon, twice.


You might have seen a lunar impact. I believe the Lunar Imapct Monitoring puts the minimum size at 10 inches to observe lunar impacts. If you haven't checked it out before, they assist amateur astronomers with the best times for impact observations.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Hellas
 


Great job filming this,I can't wait until I get my telescope! It is amazing what you can do when you put forth a little effort ....ps screw the nay-sayers - keep practicing and you never know what you might catch!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by patmac573
 


I am amazed.

Naysayers= people who know what they're talking about!

Divvy.









 
79
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join