Apollo 9: Gigantic Cilindrical Objects caught in front of the Moon...

reply to post by SayonaraJupiter


I don't have that program, but I tried to do the same thing in Gimp and nothing showed up.

reply to post by ArMaP


There's two images on the NASA site the larger high res which is the one linked by Arken and the "enhanced sharpened" which is the one this person used to achieve that effect.

This is a strange thread to get mixed up in. So far I've been told something I wrote wasn't true when I was agreeing with them and linked to wiki sooo...

I said hat I thought this was on pg.2 which many people have repeated, but somehow ignored where I wrote it.

Arken

JimOberg
Apollo-9's moon mission?

Arken, please stop injuring people by making them fall off their chairs laughing so hard.

Clue: There WAS no "Apollo-9 moon mission". Did you really think there had been?

JimOberg, Presumed Expert Of "Something", (for the future... only PEOS) please stop injuring yourself by making this kind of comments.
en.wikipedia.org...

It was the first test of the Lunar Module, not an actual landing.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by JimOberg


Hello Jim,
I respect your knowledge and I appreciate your posts but ... your answer is a little bit strange. When many people sees something we call it: "mass histeria"; when one person see something: "misinterpretation" ... and you come to say that you wouldn't trust your own observations ... sort of saying that your censorship mechanisms are not trust worthy, and you dismiss them. Hmmm .... I don't wanna go where "my little gray cells" are leading me.
Understand that I don't mean to be disrespectful.
Best regards

draknoir2
It was the first test of the Lunar Module, not an actual landing.

en.wikipedia.org...

Correct. And it wasn't a "Moon Mission" per se, because the whole Apollo 9 mission took place in low earth orbit. It wasn't until Apollo 10 that they tested the Lunar Module in lunar orbit.

SasquatchHunter
This is a strange thread to get mixed up in. So far I've been told something I wrote wasn't true when I was agreeing with them and linked to wiki sooo...

I said hat I thought this was on pg.2 which many people have repeated, but somehow ignored where I wrote it.

Are referring to this post?:

SasquatchHunter
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

Crosshairs are all over Apollo mission photos.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

If so, I disagreed with that statement (or rather clarified) because it is not entirely true, and that clarification was germane to my argument. I clarified that not all Apollo images contained the crosshairs, which I demonstrated by showing another image from that same film magazine (magazine 23/D) that had no crosshairs. In fact, as far as I can tell none of the images from Apollo 9 have crosshairs, except for the OP's image.

That was important to my theory about the lines being the crosshairs of the sextant (i.e., maybe the image was take with the lens of the camera pointed against the eyepeice of the sextant). The sextant has a double-horizontal crosshair (like the double horizontal line of the OPs image) while the normal crosshairs seen on many of the Apollo images only have one horizontal per crosshair.

draknoir2

Arken

JimOberg
Apollo-9's moon mission?

Arken, please stop injuring people by making them fall off their chairs laughing so hard.

Clue: There WAS no "Apollo-9 moon mission". Did you really think there had been?

JimOberg, Presumed Expert Of "Something", (for the future... only PEOS) please stop injuring yourself by making this kind of comments.
en.wikipedia.org...

It was the first test of the Lunar Module, not an actual landing.

en.wikipedia.org...

WHO said Landing on Moon??
WHERE you and your friend PEOS find that words in my posts?
Only the Bizarre fantasy of the PEOS!

Arken

draknoir2

Arken

JimOberg
Apollo-9's moon mission?

Arken, please stop injuring people by making them fall off their chairs laughing so hard.

Clue: There WAS no "Apollo-9 moon mission". Did you really think there had been?

JimOberg, Presumed Expert Of "Something", (for the future... only PEOS) please stop injuring yourself by making this kind of comments.
en.wikipedia.org...

It was the first test of the Lunar Module, not an actual landing.

en.wikipedia.org...

WHO said Landing on Moon??
WHERE you and your friend PEOS find that words in my posts?
Only the Bizarre fantasy of the PEOS!

Uh, yeah.

edit on 27-10-2013 by Arken because: (no reason given)

Pretty sure I saw "moon mission" too... before the correction.

Arken

draknoir2

Arken

JimOberg
Apollo-9's moon mission?

Arken, please stop injuring people by making them fall off their chairs laughing so hard.

Clue: There WAS no "Apollo-9 moon mission". Did you really think there had been?

JimOberg, Presumed Expert Of "Something", (for the future... only PEOS) please stop injuring yourself by making this kind of comments.
en.wikipedia.org...

It was the first test of the Lunar Module, not an actual landing.

en.wikipedia.org...

WHO said Landing on Moon??
WHERE you and your friend PEOS find that words in my posts?
Only the Bizarre fantasy of the PEOS!

Well, I think Jim Oberg was being intentionally obtuse when he claimed that Apollo 9 was not a "Moon" mission.

It could be argued that Apollo 9 wasn't really a "Moon mission", because the entire Apollo 9 mission was done in low Earth orbit. I beleive that's what Jim's point was -- i.e., the mission never left earth orbit, so it wasn't a Moon mission.

HOWEVER, it was a mission that was critical to future Apollo "Moon" missions (missions that actually went top the Moon). In that respect, it was part of the Apollo Moon program, even though Apollo 9 never went anywhere near the Moon.

I think Jim was just trying to hard to trip up someone on the semantics of it

reply to post by JimOberg

Point is, there are millions of photos taken from Earth, even most of them a little closer to the moon than Apollo-9' view. Any of them are as good a view as this mission got, so why present it as it were a superior data source?

We understand well???

Which kind of comment is this? Insane....

So: I have a dog called Hugo and I shoot a photo with a flower in his mouth. Tender!

And you Mr. PEOS say: "why that photo if you have hundreds of Hugo's photos?"

For the FLOWER in his mouth! Mr. JimOberg! For the FLOWER in his mouth........

Soylent Green Is People

Arken

draknoir2

Arken

JimOberg
Apollo-9's moon mission?

Arken, please stop injuring people by making them fall off their chairs laughing so hard.

Clue: There WAS no "Apollo-9 moon mission". Did you really think there had been?

JimOberg, Presumed Expert Of "Something", (for the future... only PEOS) please stop injuring yourself by making this kind of comments.
en.wikipedia.org...

It was the first test of the Lunar Module, not an actual landing.

en.wikipedia.org...

WHO said Landing on Moon??
WHERE you and your friend PEOS find that words in my posts?
Only the Bizarre fantasy of the PEOS!

Well, I think Jim Oberg was being intentionally obtuse when he claimed that Apollo 9 was not a "Moon" mission.

It could be argued that Apollo 9 wasn't really a "Moon mission", because the entire Apollo 9 mission was done in low Earth orbit. I beleive that's what Jim's point was -- i.e., the mission never left earth orbit, so it wasn't a Moon mission. HOWEVER, it was a mission that was critical to future Apollo "Moon" missions (missions that actually went top the Moon). In that respect, it was part of the Apollo Moon program.

I think Jim was just trying to hard to trip up someone on the semantics of it

edit on 10/28/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

Frankly I don't understand.

The question IS NOT If the Apollo 9 is landed or not on the Moon.

The question are "Three Anomalies", like Gigantic Cilindrical Objects, that cast their own shadow, right in front of the Moon, on a photo, accidentally shoot by Apollo 9 crew.

Arken
reply to post by JimOberg

 

Point is, there are millions of photos taken from Earth, even most of them a little closer to the moon than Apollo-9' view. Any of them are as good a view as this mission got, so why present it as it were a superior data source?

We understand well???

Which kind of comment is this?

Insane....

So: I have a dog called Hugo and I shoot a photo with a flower in his mouth. Tender!

And you Mr. PEOS say: "why that photo if you have hundreds of Hugo's photos?"

For the FLOWER in his mouth! Mr. JimOberg!

For the FLOWER in his mouth........

What's "PEOS"?

draknoir2

Arken
reply to post by JimOberg

 

Point is, there are millions of photos taken from Earth, even most of them a little closer to the moon than Apollo-9' view. Any of them are as good a view as this mission got, so why present it as it were a superior data source?

We understand well???

Which kind of comment is this?

Insane....

So: I have a dog called Hugo and I shoot a photo with a flower in his mouth. Tender!

And you Mr. PEOS say: "why that photo if you have hundreds of Hugo's photos?"

For the FLOWER in his mouth! Mr. JimOberg!

For the FLOWER in his mouth........

What's "PEOS"?

Acronym of Presumed Expert Of Something....

So: I have a dog called Hugo and I shoot a photo with a flower in his mouth. Tender!

And you Mr. PEOS say: "why that photo if you have hundreds of Hugo's photos?"

For the FLOWER in his mouth! Mr. JimOberg!

For the FLOWER in his mouth........

That's the funniest thing I've read on here for some time Arken

reply to post by gortex


Thx gortex.

Sometime irony is the sharpest weapon...

JimOberg
Apollo-9's moon mission?

Arken, please stop injuring people by making them fall off their chairs laughing so hard.

Clue: There WAS no "Apollo-9 moon mission". Did you really think there had been?

I don't think he mentioned 'Apollo 9 MOON Mission anywhere, did he? Or I must be missing something here!

gortexThat's the funniest thing I've read on here for some time Arken

I quite like that myself!
Anyway, for the thread, most of the usual explanations don't seem to quite fit. My guess is that it is something in reprocessing.