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.

 

I'd like to show you a de-blurred HOAX picture of the Clementine Structure...

page: 11
61
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 02:06 AM
link   
Aww dammit. Looks like I was taken in by a huckster.

Apologies to those I challenged without merit.

FITO.




posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyInTheOintment
 


That's not to say I don't believe there are secrets being carefully guarded with regards our all-seeing eye of night - I do, and I believe they are VERY carefully guarded. Perhaps this ATSer has scammed us - but I certainly believe that NASA/JPL et al have improved over time at hiding whatever they are hiding (when the need arises to hide it).

FITO.

PS - in future I will stick to the disclaimer ''imho'' before commenting on Moon threads, otherwise I'll get ripped to shreds within five seconds of posting.



edit on 29-8-2013 by FlyInTheOintment because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 02:23 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyInTheOintment
 


It's normal for people like you to call others trolls and deniers.

Apology on deaf ears etc.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 10:42 AM
link   
OP is definitely on the right track here so I hope he doesn't give up. People here will eat up everybody for any Moon alien stuff probably because so many people have come and gone without delivering. That's actually the good thing about this place, it's like a ghetto peer-review where you can get attacked for bad research instead of being politely told.

Ending with a shameless plug. Try to find all the weird rock stuff in these images of Moon surface. Make an anaglyph, find weird patterns across multiple samples, debunk, whatever. There is a lot more to come.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by PINGi14
 


Your thread was already debunked...



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by raymundoko
reply to post by PINGi14
 


Your thread was already debunked...


Please enlighten us. Elaborate. Your words mean nothing atm.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by PINGi14
 


So you are basically running to a hoax thread to try and get supporters for your alien rocks. Unsubscribe. Ignore.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by raymundoko
 


I rest my case.


(post by Arken removed for a manners violation)

posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 02:22 PM
link   
Well, this is the picture. It "passed" Photoshop CS4, Smart Sharpen with "Remove Gaussian Blur". Made it as simple as possible, but I guess it is enough. Those free-hand white arrows are my "addition" to the picture.
There's really nothing interesting there .... just a few spheres. Nothing else.
Bellow is the link to the picture.

Whatever is there is there



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Asikakim
To ufo believers it's supposed to be a spaceship with a giant alien fixin it. No joke.


Think you'll find that applies to SOME ufo believers.

However...it may be YOU who is showing ignorance of possibility here, not 'them'.

For example, you appear to think it strange that some people consider the possibility of a giant ET, even one miles in height.

Why is that?

What are basing your 'ET size chart' on exactly? The size of us Humans perhaps?

How about the size of bacteria, they are living organisms and very small.

Their small size doesn't mean we, lions or elephants don't exist, so why would our relatively small size mean a much larger life form cannot exist?

How about relative to the size of our star, Sol?

Then again, we have the star Eta Carinae at roughly 5 million times the size of our Sun, or VY Canis Majoris at about 1 Billion times the size of our sun or even Betelgeuse at 1.5 Billion times the size...make you think doesn't it!

Imagine if the average local system lifeform's size is determined by the size of their system's Star..that would make 'our 10 mile high ET on the moon' look fairly short compared to what could be out there around Betelgeuse!

But no, i don't believe it's an ET in that image. I do think there is something being deliberately obscured though, but not what.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by MysterX
But no, i don't believe it's an ET in that image. I do think there is something being deliberately obscured though, but not what.


It's astonishing you say that since in THIS very same thread, people have contributed images of the same area on moon WITHOUT the blur. In other words: That there is IN FACT NOTHING has been proven several pages ago. Not only has it been proven that there is in fact nothing, it has therefore also been proven that no-one deliberately altered or obscured the image, with the exception of the OP, oh what irony. So..if you or anyone still *thinks* there is something deliberately obscured, it's simply because of a lack of knowledge, not to say "ignorance".

(And this is why the site owner put it into the hoax bin...because the OP and probably several other people are not even willing to go that extra mile, to do that little bit of 5mins research. It's like "selective cherry-picking" of whatever evidence for whatever claim and then deliberately ignoring any evidence/proof which could easily show that the assumption is incorrect.)
edit on 29-8-2013 by NoRulesAllowed because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ExquisitExamplE
 



So you're telling me that you actually "see" an animal, like a giraffe or a camel, sitting down in that picture? You may tell me in response that you do see that, but we both know that isn't the truth, that you were simply making up something weird in order to mock the OP, which is the definition of trolling, although I'm sure a self-proclaimed super genius such as yourself is far too full of themself to admit to it.


if you cant see the obvious giraffe, you are blind or a troll.


mr. self proclaimed "Writer-Fighter-Scholar" which you to have not demonstrated a single characteristic of being any of those things. My Super Genius status remains intact as the above picture demonstrates. good day.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Glad to see this was moved where it belongs. Amazing how many gullible folks hang around here, eager to jump on any bandwagon they can and defend it to the end.



posted on Aug, 29 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.


(post by TheCrimsonGhost removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by NoRulesAllowed
 


Well then, i suppose you are easily astonished..and if you enjoy that astonished sensation, i'm glad to have helped you on your way to finding it.

Great post by the way...



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by raymundoko
reply to post by MysterX
 


You are fundamentally confused about what PTM is.


Actually, you seem to be confused about what i wrote.

I never once claimed in the post to which you are replying, that what i was describing was indeed the PTM technique.

If you re-read what i wrote, you may notice that i said something to the effect of "..and the effect is very similar to a dedicated applet or program. Ideally, you'd want a real live subject and real light sources, which would give a better result..".

Discernment seems to be a lost art these days.



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 08:45 AM
link   
reply to post by funkster4
 


Picture kind of looks like a fountain. with a couple alien looking statues in the middle of it. Or maybe it's some aliens taking a bath? pretty cool anyways!



posted on Aug, 30 2013 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by MysterX

Originally posted by raymundoko
reply to post by MysterX
 


You are fundamentally confused about what PTM is.


Actually, you seem to be confused about what i wrote.

I never once claimed in the post to which you are replying, that what i was describing was indeed the PTM technique.

If you re-read what i wrote, you may notice that i said something to the effect of "..and the effect is very similar to a dedicated applet or program. Ideally, you'd want a real live subject and real light sources, which would give a better result..".

Discernment seems to be a lost art these days.



I don't mean to jump in but you said

What the OP did is a valid PTM technique

If someone disagrees, they may say you are confused about what PTM is. But carry on, I'm trying to understand it better




top topics



 
61
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join