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.

 

ET structure on Moon

page: 15
80
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by arianna
 


There is already a high quality image. It's 300 mb in size if you want to go download it (there are also some 1.6gb raw image files if you want those). You can clearly see it is an imaging artefact.

Also, so you are no longer confused, electrical arch discharge IS plasma. Saying "static or plasma discharge" shows a complete lack of understanding of the process. Static and Current electricity generate/flow in different manners, but all discharges are plasma.

Edit: PS those "conduits" are located in several other areas of MULTIPLE images and multiple areas of that same image. Many times there is an arch discharge of some kind associated with them.
edit on 16-7-2013 by raifordko because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Echoes
 


You proved my point by re-posting a pic of electrostatic discharge. It's not my fault you don't understand what you are seeing.



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by CosmicQuest
 


Are you serious? That's film emulsion. It happens to all kinds of film. THIS IS FROM THE FILM. People who've never seen film their whole lives exist now…



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Has anybody compared the image to the LROC images? Google? I tried but was not able to.



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by vpjanitorial
reply to post by CosmicQuest
 


Are you serious? That's film emulsion. It happens to all kinds of film. THIS IS FROM THE FILM. People who've never seen film their whole lives exist now…


I know, it is actually getting a bit sad.

Here is the data to prove it is caused by the imaging process:

apollo.sese.asu.edu...
apollo.sese.asu.edu...


A bright, lightning-like feature is found on a small number of images. This type of blemish is the result of a spark caused by static discharge. As the film moves through the camera system (see Figure 1), static charge is built up and, when discharged, an image of the spark is captured by the film. These features typically originate at the edge of the image and branch inward. The sizes vary greatly, from small, discrete bright spots (Figure 3A), to encompassing an entire half of a Metric image (Figure 3B). In the affected images, the spark may take on many different forms, several examples are given below. This list is by no means inclusive of all the "spark" images.



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Worst. Explanation. Ever.

Funny how the entire unidentifiable object is contained entirely within the dark/shaded portion of the crater. EASILY photoshopped or super imposed.

Next, wouldn't the 'plume' have a somewhat *AT US* effect from that viewpoint (and if it was sideways, wouldn't it light up or at least cast some light on the surface of the dark portion it is 'ejecting' over)?

Simply awful. Think it through, man.
edit on 7/16/2013 by SquirrelNutz because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by SquirrelNutz
 


Electrostatic discharge can go in any direction depending on where the two points of charge are located. Something this large would light up the entire crater below it. The reason it doesn't, is this is probably a discharge the size of your thumb within the imaging equipment itself.



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 06:06 PM
link   
I have not read through this entire thread but I will say this... this is an image artifact. What is not an image artifact are the literally hundreds of buildings you can see in Google Earth (moon portion) in Tycho crater. So while some of you are slamming the OP hard because it is an image artifact take a look at Tycho crater on Google moon. In particular the Northwest to Southwest quadrants from roughly 10,000 feet. Those are not rockfalls. They are typical building sized (use measuring tool) geometric shapes in organized patterns casting shadows. I took an image from Google Earth of Chicago from 10,000 feet, converted to black and white and used a blurring tool. Looks very similar to what I'm seeing in Tycho. The more you look at the imagery the clearer things become and no it is not a case of seeing what you want to see. I have no doubt the moon is far more interesting than anyone here can comprehend.

Just my .02



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Is there an official page for this image? I'd rule out anything until I saw it came from a legit source. Like stated in numerous other post just because you don't know what it is doesn't mean it is E.T. It could just be a camera error..or more than likely just a hoax.



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Aqadux
 




Is there an official page for this image? I'd rule out anything until I saw it came from a legit source


wms.lroc.asu.edu...



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Aqadux
 


As has been pointed out, it is an official image on an official site. The very site hosting it also gives an official explanation.



posted on Jul, 16 2013 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Biigs -

"Lets take pictures and examine them closely"
Anyone else think its pretty bloody stupid to start stitching them all together etc and cause "anomalies" in the pics and distortions.
The entire point of a photograph is to have a clear, untouched image.
If joining them together causes problems, dont do it! *le sigh*
Yes, I agree, but when it is obvious that these photos are NOT the originals, then any "enhancing" has NOT been started by us.
I assume you think that these images are untouched and pristine. I think that attitude is naive and blinkered but of course, you probably think my assumption that the images are 'doctored' is similar. Panoramas by their very nature are 'stiched together' and the whole base map of the Moon is stitched together and tiled. So now where is your clear untouched image? I wish we had them.

==========================
usfighterNH -

I have not read through this entire thread but I will say this... this is an image artifact. What is not an image artifact are the literally hundreds of buildings you can see in Google Earth (moon portion) in Tycho crater. So while some of you are slamming the OP hard because it is an image artifact take a look at Tycho crater on Google moon. In particular the Northwest to Southwest quadrants from roughly 10,000 feet. Those are not rockfalls. They are typical building sized (use measuring tool) geometric shapes in organized patterns casting shadows. I took an image from Google Earth of Chicago from 10,000 feet, converted to black and white and used a blurring tool. Looks very similar to what I'm seeing in Tycho. The more you look at the imagery the clearer things become and no it is not a case of seeing what you want to see. I have no doubt the moon is far more interesting than anyone here can comprehend.

Please go to this thread and post your Tycho Crater evidence AFTER you have looked in Quickmap and then we can see what it looks like at 100 feet height.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Everybody knows we have a base on the dark side of the moon! But the Government won't tell us about it!



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by CosmicQuest
Apollo 16 photo archive, shows a clear image of what looks like a power plant or possibly an alien spacecraft on the surface of our moon
The structure seems to be generating or attracting a plume of pure energy


NOT anything on the Moon. I enhanced the photo a bit. Downloaded and cleared up the shady areas. As it happens, this power plant look alike is part of an oblique line (or rather two lines) , that extends outside the exposed part of the film

So, whatever it is, it wasn't in front of the lens. It is either a post exposure anomaly, or something that happened inside the camera while taking the shot. Maybe a static discharge, maybe somthing mechanical, I don't know.

But NOT an object photographed by the Apollo's camera.

You can test this yourself by downloading the PNG (medium is OK), and viewing it using a viewer capable of correcting colors, lighting and so on. Irfaview is a good one. Just pres SHift-G, slide the Gamma slider to about 3,7 and look. You'll notice a lot of dust particles, but also two stripes. One of them associates with the so called energy or whatever. And it extends into the non exposed area (i repeat).

Btw, about 1/3 of the panorama photo's on that site have similar stripes. All under the same angle, although one of them has a mirrored streak.

So, test for yourself, or view my enhanced image on Filesanywhere: Photo Artifact Showing Sorry, putting the picture here wouldn't work, as you have to zoom in. Its 1 meg you have to download. But I'll try a smaller portion:




As a bonus, I like to add a cute little lunar animal, something in between a hedgehog and a rabbit, found on another moon picture from the same series. Moondust, lab dust, or strange being photographed by NASA?




The negs ar a mess. But please decide for yourself, and believe in the power plant - or not.
edit on 17-7-2013 by flywatch because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-7-2013 by flywatch because: Minor corrections, mostly spelling



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by KingPanzergrenadier
Everybody knows we have a base on the dark side of the moon! But the Government won't tell us about it!


The moon has no dark side. No more than Earth has one. I'm on that side now, but in a few hours I'll be out of it.
edit on 17-7-2013 by flywatch because: grammar



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Wow! NASA is extremely secretive with things like this. I'm surprised that they put that on the internet, must have been a mistake...

Now how will they explain that?



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 10:31 PM
link   

We have seen this plasma-like or fungus-like tendrils on other apollo images and people have thought they were some kind of alien too.


Fungus is a well known menace to film emulsions. And it's dark in negatives, so it will show up as light structures in dark areas, in the positive image. Still I'm placing my bets on static discharge, or maybe mechanical disruption of some layer in the film. One thing it is most certainly not: a photographed object. One can easily see that, having noticed that the oblique line this artifact is a associated with, extends outside the area of the film that is exposed when taking pictures. That's right, this line ends between the transportation holes, where there is no image of anything. So, it really doesn't matter if it's fungus, static discharge or any other artifact, it was NOT in front of the lens at any time.



posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by GRANDWULF
Wow! NASA is extremely secretive with things like this. I'm surprised that they put that on the internet, must have been a mistake...

Now how will they explain that?


You're the one who says they are secretive and therefore must have made a mistake. So you should do the explaining. I'm not surprised at all. And probably neither is NASA.



posted on Jul, 18 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Spacespider
 


Could this be the massive long "Bridge of Light" that some of the astronauts claimed to have seen on one of the Apollo missions? I think it was supposed to be across a crater, and once they looked over the rim they saw the bridge and a threatening "craft". From what I have read in the past, this was the moment of being told "you are not welcome here."

Wish I had links to those astronaut claims. But I can't be the only person that knows that story.



new topics

top topics



 
80
<< 12  13  14    16 >>

log in

join