Strange Structures in a Strange "Strip" nearby the Apollo14 landing site...

Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by Arken

 

Multiple sources.

Two sources according to this .

Google Moon, which uses images from NASA’s Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter as well as Japan’s Kaguya mission.
blogs.discovermagazine.com...

Your source is fake, lie or it is unfamiliar with...

Google Moon use also Lunar Orbiter Mosaic Images, as you, me and one Billion of people could see...


Hmmm... your attempt to try to debunk everything is quite souspicious.
Are you the same good old Gortex or someone else who stolen his account?

Also for the open minded, his interveiw with project Camelot.

(I have no opinion on this, so don't ask)

reply to post by Arken


You still haven't said what version number & build of Google earth you are using.

Originally posted by Mianeye
reply to post by Arken

 

Yeah, i was really excited when i found that page back in time, took me months to go through it all, and my introduction to the guys you just mentioned, it can only be understood with a WIDE open mind, but can make you go mental if you take it to serious

This Topic "The Aliens" is really but really serious.

And yes, you can go mental when we consider that "the things up there are Worst/Better than we can imagine...

That particular piece of Google Moon is (I am fairly sure) composed of Lunar Orbiter 3 images of the Apollo 14 landing area - you can see the wqhite marker crosses on the image. They have used a better quality orbiter photograph than the base layer available in the Global maps of Google Moon..

The alleged structures are just artefacts of the stitching process joining a couple of these high resolution lunar orbiter images together. There are no buildings or walls.

The high resolution one showing Apollo 14's landing area is here: www.lpi.usra.edu...[/ url]

It is image h2 on number 3133 on this page [url=http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunarorbiter/mission/?3]http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunarorbiter/mission/?3

(tried editing the links but it still wasn't happy - copy and paste should work!)

reply to post by Arken

Google Moon use also Lunar Orbiter Mosaic Images, as you, me and one Billion of people could see...

Sorry I don't use Google Moon so don't have first hand knowledge but I accept the link was wrong .

Hmmm... your attempt to try to debunk everything is quite souspicious.
Are you the same good old Gortex or someone else who stolen his account?

No same old me Arken just my belief in this subject is ebbing away at an alarming rate ... Google Moon images and rocks on Mars just don't cut the mustard .

Keep searching mate one day you may find the pot of Gold at the end of the rainbow

Originally posted by Arken

Your source is fake, lie or it is unfamiliar with...
....
Hmmm... your attempt to try to debunk everything is quite souspicious.

Thanks for the morning chuckle, the pinnacle and "shadow" that is 90 degrees off all the other shadows in the image.

Originally posted by onebigmonkey
That particular piece of Google Moon is (I am fairly sure) composed of Lunar Orbiter 3 images of the Apollo 14 landing area - you can see the wqhite marker crosses on the image. They have used a better quality orbiter photograph than the base layer available in the Global maps of Google Moon..

The alleged structures are just artefacts of the stitching process joining a couple of these high resolution lunar orbiter images together. There are no buildings or walls.

The high resolution one showing Apollo 14's landing area is here: www.lpi.usra.edu...[/ url]

It is image h2 on number 3133 on this page [url=http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunarorbiter/mission/?3]http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunarorbiter/mission/?3

(tried editing the links but it still wasn't happy - copy and paste should work!)

edit on 6-8-2013 by onebigmonkey because: link error

edit on 6-8-2013 by onebigmonkey because: link problem

Links fixed

lunarorbiter images

lunarorbiter mission 3

reply to post by JimOberg

Thanks for the morning chuckle, the pinnacle and "shadow" that is 90 degrees off all the other shadows in the image.

As I said you several times Mr. JimOberg, presumed expert of something, ... your excessive self esteem is not good for you

YOU refer to this one...


The different shadow depend from the sun lights af the TWO DIFFERENT MISSION in DIFFERENT YEARS and DIFFERENT DAYS and DIFFERENT HOURS.

Oh, the RED LINE is the frontier from each other.... of the TWO DIFFERENT IMAGES!

Thank for the continuous laughs...

Originally posted by Arken
reply to post by JimOberg

 

Thanks for the morning chuckle, the pinnacle and "shadow" that is 90 degrees off all the other shadows in the image.

As I said you several times Mr. JimOberg, presumed expert of something, ... your excessive self esteem is not good for you

YOU refer to this one...

Oh, the RED LINE is the frontier from each other.... of the TWO DIFFERENT IMAGES!

Thank for the continuous laughs...

edit on 6-8-2013 by Arken because: (no reason given)

Well if taken from the LRO site only an IDIOT would not know the red line shows the border of an LRO image strip but you would know that Arken because you are not and IDIOT are you

reply to post by Arken


Great find! I'll take this cool stuff over the "doom porn" folks post on ATS anyday!

You really find good stuff and I always check it out! Thanks!

Here is the OP's picture orientated with the top of the photo being towards the North:



Center of that picture is located at:

Decimal: -3.8646 , -17.4391

Degree Lat and Long:

3 deg 51' 53" S
17 deg 26' 21" W

View of the same area from the LROC, orientated the same as the above picture with the top being North:

Originally posted by wmd_2008

Originally posted by Arken
reply to post by JimOberg

 

Thanks for the morning chuckle, the pinnacle and "shadow" that is 90 degrees off all the other shadows in the image.

As I said you several times Mr. JimOberg, presumed expert of something, ... your excessive self esteem is not good for you

YOU refer to this one...

Oh, the RED LINE is the frontier from each other.... of the TWO DIFFERENT IMAGES!

Thank for the continuous laughs...

edit on 6-8-2013 by Arken because: (no reason given)

Well if taken from the LRO site only an IDIOT would not know the red line shows the border of an LRO image strip but you would know that Arken because you are not and IDIOT are you

ONLY an IDIOT,wmd_2008, would not know that the red line is added by me for put in evidence the different images of the same area And only an IDIOT, wmd_2008, would not know the images (both) are taken from Lunar Orbiter, and not Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, but you would know that wmd_2008 because YOU ARE not an IDIOT are you

reply to post by Arken


That's why I said if.

reply to post by Arken


Brilliant Arken, Now wait for the inevitable ROCK's or STONE's, Now this is a find, looks very industrial to me and I wonder if we may yet stumble on some ancient battle fields on the moon as it may be the first and the last place if the earth was attacked in the past or if a civilisation or species before our own from here or elsewhere may have lingered.
I am definitely going to be looking at this one and trying various filter's and enhancement's.

My gut feeling is that you have found something definite here and it is not a stone or rocks, now is it of terrestrial origin possibly ancient or Alien is the question.

Arken, From looking at your submitted images the formations do look somewhat artificial. To determine exactly what is there a certain amount of image enhancement will be required to sharpen and bring out the detail then we may be in a better position to make a more detailed visual analysis of what is really on the terrain.

For anyone who says they are rocks just rocks. Of course there are rocks on the moon but these particular 'rocks' are something completely different.

Originally posted by arianna
Arken, From looking at your submitted images the formations do look somewhat artificial. To determine exactly what is there a certain amount of image enhancement will be required to sharpen and bring out the detail then we may be in a better position to make a more detailed visual analysis of what is really on the terrain.

For anyone who says they are rocks just rocks. Of course there are rocks on the moon but these particular 'rocks' are something completely different.

I for one am not claiming they are rocks, I am claiming they are products of google's stitching process and not there at all. As these alleged structures are to be found on lunar orbiter images, they should be pretty easy to find on the high res originals at the apollo image atlas (see the link kindly fixed by a mod in the post I made above).

If they are genuinely there they will be on the originals.

reply to post by LABTECH767

I am definitely going to be looking at this one and trying various filter's and enhancement's.

My gut feeling is that you have found something definite here and it is not a stone or rocks, now is it of terrestrial origin possibly ancient or Alien is the question.

Thanks, I appreciate your efforts. Let me know.

We can take a look at the area that Arken has indicated by looking at the original Lunar Orbiter frames.

A link to these frames has already been posted (and ignored of course), but here it is again:

Lunar Orbiter Frame 3133

Before diving down into it, it is important for people to understand how these images were made:

The Lunar Orbiter used two cameras, one at 80mm focal and one at 610mm focal. Here is how the images were recorded and developed:

The Lunar Orbiter orbital photographs were transmitted to Earth as analog data after onboard scanning of the original film into a series of strips. The data were written to magnetic tape and also to film. The film data were used to create hand-made mosaics of Lunar Orbiter frames. Each LO exposure resulted in two photographs: medium-resolution frames recorded by the 80-mm focal-length lens and high-resolution frames recorded by the 610-mm focal length lens. Due to their large size, HR frames were divided into three sections, or sub-frames. Large-format prints (16 x 20 inches) from the mosaics were created and several copies were distributed across the U.S. to NASA image and data libraries known as Regional Planetary Information Facilities. The resulting outstanding views were of generally very high spatial resolution and covered a substantial portion of the lunar surface, but they suffered from a “venetian blind” striping, missing or duplicated data, and frequent saturation effects that hampered their use. Nevertheless, for many years these images have been the basis of much of lunar scientific research. Because they were obtained at low to moderate Sun angles, the Lunar Orbiter photographic mosaics are particularly useful for studying the morphology of lunar topographic features.

It's important to understand that the images suffered from the "venetian blind" striping, duplicated and missing data, and of course how the pictures or "prints" were developed, stacked and stitched together.

Here is the over all final product of the area:



Here is the file for the source of the image:

Frame 3133 TIFF format 17MB Resolution 5900 x 4375

You can see the "venetian blind" effect quite well in this image from the individual images being stitched together.

Let's start zooming in:



Zooming in, we can still see the blind effect, and even developer flaws (look to the left of the image), and if you look carefully towards the center, we can see Arken's "strip".

Zoomed in even more:



The "strip" of "artifacts" is actually nothing more than a product of how the frames were developed. In other words:

There are no artifacts, except on the print. Not the moon itself.

Source the image, don't use it directly from Google Moon. After sourcing the image, view the original plates.
Understand how images were developed 50 to 40 years ago, and how artifacts in the prints can show up (hairs, skin cells, fibers, fluid emulsion drips).

reply to post by eriktheawful


Thanks for your effort Erik, But these are not artifact of the print.

There are shadows beneath each anomaly and also the straight lines (pipes?) cast shadows.
You can clearly see crater in the "strip" as they are and also the aim "White cross" of the Hasselblad.