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.

 

Alien technology on the moon - Clementine's Secrets - This video offers a short preview

page: 1
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:46 AM
link   
In 1994 NASA and the U.S. Department Of Defense launched the Clementine satellite.
Clementine took pictures of the entire moon surface and on these photos it send back, there were "things" no one was meant to see. This is a preview of the two videos I will upload soon revealing the truth and showing you in full detail what is hidden behind these smudged photos. NASA will have some explaining to do!



See you soon!

Greetz,

Sander
edit on 31-1-2012 by 1967sander because: vc




posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by 1967sander
 


There is a artifact, and it may or may not be anything. But using a sharpen filter on a completely blurred out section of a artifact really doesnt prove anything, and certainly does not show us "what is behind the stiching" Interesting video though.



edit on 31-1-2012 by sicksonezer0 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by 1967sander
 




NASA will have some explaining to do!


so do you.

what am i supposed to be looking at here?

it was all a big blob?

second, the intro was boring.

it took a full minute to watch a picture with a blob...

i don't see it.
edit on 31-1-2012 by kn0wh0w because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:52 AM
link   
You should add the part from the disclosure project where people show up saying they used to work smudging moon pictures for NASA



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
I am sure your right about something being there......

But I have no idea how you can make out "something mechanical" a "drill", a 20 mile long and 2 mile high "machine" -


Let me know when I can stand next to it



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
I see no alien technology.
Please post some pics and not a video.
Or some screen caps at least.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
I have no idea what i'm supposed to be looking at here.


I look forward to the next video where it says it'll be displayed in enough detail it'd be like 'standing next to it'. Just so I have an idea what it's supposed to be, other than black and white blobs and smudges.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by 1967sander
 


Hey sanders,

For some reason I have seen all your vids on youtube. I am not a fan of the ones with all the text, but the others with you speaking is entertaining.

I am not saying I believe you, but it is entertaining to watch.

I will say this intro was a bust.

I do want to watch the video though. You do a good job, of making me want to watch more!

Keep searching dude. You have a good imagination. Honestly I can't see it, but I am sure you will clarify in your next video a little better.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Altalux just sharpens and brightens images, it's all it does.

www.tommesani.com...

So all the OP has done is sharpen and brighten the image 10,000 times, we see 700 in the preview.

The software also uses a grid pattern to fine tune the enhancements...

www.tommesani.com...

This is why the grids are showing up, the images has been brightened on a ridiculous level.

Also why the non blurred areas turn to rubbish.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   
Don't worry. By the time Sander works his CGI magic, we'll be seeing all sorts of things. He will, however, refuse to explain how he got such sensational results. Been there, done that.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
The detail range of the Clementine satellite Hi-RISE hi def camera is between 7 to 20 m per pixel, depending on its altitude in its elliptical orbit, so to identify things 'at more detail' a football field would appear as a 3x6 pixel rectangle, and a football stadium would likely be no larger than 20 pixels at its widest. Without going into scientific specs this is what you have to determine 'detail' from.

Good Luck!



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 10:18 AM
link   
It's ironic that the craters called semen, but then it goes on to show a big smudge, therefor the movie is w**k



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   
So, this famous Clementine' image is from the same infamous image of Lunar Orbiter "Zeeman Crater" ???



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
I saw nothing that the video narrator described in that picture. When you start manipulating an already distorted picture, how hard is it to start shaping it to something else imagined? People see what they want to see.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by wonderboy2402
 


and some people blindly believe everything their government (agencies) tells them. Why dont you try it yourself on any of the other smudged images. You will be amazed what they hide. However, in your case you will probably see only what someone else tells you you should see.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Come on... Do you know what is 20 mile long and 2 mile high... Its a colossal machine. Just think for a few minutes what means 20 miles long. (32 km)




Earth Mover Specifications:

* The mover stands 311 feet tall and 705 feet long.
* It weighs over 45,500 tons
* Cost $100 million to build
* Took 5 years to design and manufacture
* 5 years to assemble.
* Requires 5 people to operate it.
* The Bucket Wheel is over 70 feet in diameter with 20 buckets, each of which can hold over 530 cubic feet of material.
* A 6-foot man can stand up inside one of the buckets.
* It moves on 12 crawlers (each is 12 feet wide, 8′ high and 46 feet long).
* There are 8 crawlers in front and 4 in back. It has a maximum speed of 1 mile in 3 hours (1/3 mile/hour).
* It can remove over 76,455 cubic meters each day. (100,000 large dump trucks at 40yds. each)

edit on 31/1/12 by blackcube because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by 1967sander
 


If I take a digital picture of a couple people, and digitally smudge the face of one of them, there is no way in hell with any digital graphics program you can restore that face for any kind of identifying signatures.

Want to test that out?



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   
He should have put a photo of himself with a smudge on his face and perform the same technique to show that we can see his face again afterwards..



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


You seem to know everything about tamper techniques right? Please explain me the technique NASA used on this particular image. How did they blur it? Or wait ... it was not blurred at all. The original was never digitally altered in anyway. The operator simply put a few grey layers over the original and adjusted contrast levels. That's all they needed to do. What I did was bring the original image back to the front.



posted on Jan, 31 2012 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by blackcube
 


For us humans this seems enormous but this machine is not made by humans. A civilization which is 1000's of years ahead of us with their technology has no limits.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join