Moon Mystery House/ Mystery Hut/ Cube: Secret Buildings in Background of the Photo

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: JamesChessman

The square shapes are due to pixelation of the digital image. Most likely an artefact of the brightening effect your applying to the image.

I would think Phage would weigh in that you are right. I would agree with you and not normally the one who always says no way. Maybe, he agrees with the op..... yea, ikr?

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: JamesChessman

This is also why I showed exactly how I manipulated the colors in my vid. I can't really catch the criticism of creating the artifacts myself, lol.

What colours did you manipulate exactly in a black and white photo? I’m not saying you deliberately created the artefacts, they are a by product of the brightening effect you applied.

If any of that looks like actual buildings or skyscrapers to you then all I can say is you’ve played to much minecraft.

Ok, that sounds like you have an idea. Now do you have some data to prove what you think here. I am more inclined with the multiple shapes to think perhaps more than electronic glitches going on in those particular pics. Photoshopping I am going to assume for this did not happen to add these shapes on purpose but they still might be real because of the intricate looking shapes I am seeing here in some of these pics.

originally posted by: McGinty
a reply to: jedi_hamster

Isn’t it contradictory to say that China has had several decades to spy on the US so they already know what the US knows, as well as saying China would disclose what they know to destroy the west?

If the first part is true, then why didn’t they disclose?

Never let the enemy know what you know about them unless it profits you. Whatever China may know about aliens it hasn’t been seen as worth disclosing yet. Perhaps there’s more profit in using that info as leverage. At least up to now!

Nasa working with the clergy might suggest that the US fear that is about to change.

depends on what they had earlier. knowledge and knowledge backed by evidence are not the same. they could acquire knowledge through spying efforts, but perhaps they didn't have clear evidence.

now they've found something on the moon and they went "ha! we're going to see what's there, buckle up cupcakes!". so it's possible they knew as much as US government for decades, but for some reason didn't make any moves to acquire evidence (which, if it's protected enough here on earth, they would have to get elsewhere, like on the moon).

but that's all based on the assumption that China and the west aren't working together. it's likely that what China is doing on the moon, and what the US government is doing regarding potential disclosure, is a result of their cooperation.

here's a wild guess: they've been given a deadline by the aliens.

there was a lot of talk about fake alien invasion, but what if the invasion will be fake, but the aliens won't be? what if the whole covid mess is designed to inject people with something that will make it impossible for aliens to communicate telepathically with those that have been vaccinated? what if that's the reason they're pushing those vacciness so hard?

in such case they can slowly prepare people for the disclosure (which will be initiated by aliens), which they'll then turn into another lie. imagine this: aliens land and try to communicate with people, but only those unvaccinated understand them, and everyone else starts to panic. people filled with fear and terror will turn to their government, which will tell them it's an invasion and that whatever they're hearing from those unvaccinated, is either a delusion or a result of aliens trying to brainwash people. "see, covid vaccine protects you from aliens!". maybe aliens could use written english, but it would be too late already. or maybe the vaccine can make people somehow toxic to them. no idea. i have a feeling it's all connected though.

of course, our governments are no match for aliens technologically, but assuming that the aliens behind disclosure are benevolent, they likely wouldn't interfere unless given permission. making it impossible for people to easily communicate with aliens would make sense to maintain control. media would blast yet another propaganda, that aliens are invading earth and kidnapping people, perhaps selling even more vacciness in the process ("get vaccinated or aliens will come for you"). and from different perspective, unvaccinated would be communicating with aliens, and perhaps they would be offered a ride to another planet. as much of a rapture scenario as you can get, except governments will turn it into alien invasion mass hysteria.

originally posted by: jedi_hamster
a reply to: JamesChessman

I don't believe you.

i've scaled and cropped the mars photo down to the same resolution (2198x1143), converted it to grayscale (not fair, your source is technically in RGB, which is an additional waste, but i wanted to show a best case scenario, that is how much detail you can realistically preserve within jpeg contraints), then saved it twice, once at a size of 118629 (slightly above your source), once at a size of 413668 (so with roughly the same amount of data per pixel as in original mars photo).

118629:

413668:

so what's next? you're going to find skyscrapers on mars?

Wading through your walls of text, I think you're being deliberately misleading and confusing and unclear.

To try to find some clarity in your posts:


-- If you're making the point that saving images at smaller size / resolution, creates artifacts, then yes, of course it does, and it's pointless for you to be arguing this.

I was never saving images at smaller sizes, for this to even be relevant. I saved the hi-res image in the same exact size as I found it online (in its highest res version that I found).

-- For your Mars photo example, I think you're just being deliberately confusing. You posted two images of different size, but you labeled it very weird to call it "118629" and "413668." I assume that's the number of pixels in each version, but then you should have said that, instead of just stating numbers without even labeling what the number is.

But assuming you're referring to total pixels, then your example proves that lowering its size and res, obviously does create artifacts, and we all knew this already before you explained it, in a deliberately confusing way.

Plus your lower res version shows some nice vertical strips of fading color changes, in the background sky. So you're only proving what everyone knows, that artifacts are created by lowering the size and res.

But what's nice there is that you're showing some normal, predictable artifacts, in these vertical strips of background shades.

In comparison with the topic photo, your example is MOST suggestive that the topic photo is legit showing some structures, in its strange building-type shapes.

Because your example only created vertical bands of different background shades.

It's not comparable to the topic photo with a seeming series of buildings. So your example only reinforces the anomalies in the topic photo.

(Also I'm wondering if you made it grayscale to deliberately create MORE such color-artifacting in your example, which I assume is what you did, but this is even more off-topic and irrelevant.)


...

Regarding jpg format:

Like I said, the original highest res image that I found online, was already jpg, and it saves automatically as jpg.

If your real point is that, after I manipulated colors, then I should have saved in a different format instead of jpg (because of the idea of the possibility of microscopic artifacts): Well if you really have a point here, it's so absolutely minimal that it's practically irrelevant and nonexistent, anyway.

It's not something visible to the human eye, AFAIK, and it's FAR more minute than the actual apparent resolution of the imagery that the topic is focused on.

Tbc

EDIT: OK I found a new list of different default settings in Preview.

If your real point is that my edits should be saved in PNG format, then I could do that in the future.

Although like you said, this is not relevant to the actual topic of the thread, and I probably need to learn more about what the best file type really is, before settling on one. Preview gives me several choices, now that I found this within Preview, and so now I'd need to decide which is really best.

Though I'm not sure what practical value this would really have, exactly. I've never looked into image file types before because it hasn't ever really come up, as meaningful...

a reply to: jedi_hamster

jishin-yogen.com...
blog-imgs-135.fc2.com...

that's a different version. may seem like a higher quality one, but it's same crap. when you'll brighten it, you'll see roughly same compression artifacts, meaning the source of those artifacts is the same.

it is higher resolution though. did someone upscale it? or maybe it's closer to the source image than the one you've used?

OK well you found a slightly higher res version, I'll have to look later if it actually looks any different. It's not necessarily even a different image, it could be the same exact image, slightly upscaled, like you mentioned, but also it might be closer to the source image, so I'll definitely look into it later.

Still, to keep realistic here, it's only slightly higher res than the one I found, anyway. 2,460 x 1,279. Whereas mine was 2198 x 1143.

So we wouldn't expect any big differences anyway lol but if it's legitimately a sharper version (and not just the same image upscaled) then I guess everything should look slightly more clear. I'll definitely check this out later.

...

Also it's absurd to criticize me for the fact that you found a slightly higher res version though. Aside from only being slightly higher, and aside from possibly being the same image upscaled:

Beyond all that, it's possible that your version wasn't even available online yet, when I made the thread...

And also, it's possible that it was already uploaded online, but for whatever reason, that version image just didn't turn up when I was image-searching, at the time.

The fact of an image being online... does not guarantee that it will show up in searches.




And beyond all that, what's the point dude, lol. If you found a better version image, then it should be a positive thing that you're contributing to the conversation... it shouldn't just be something to be obnoxious about, lol. You should have some value of actually discussing the topic and learning more about it.

how can you claim your version is the highest quality one released when you didn't even bother doing reverse image search using google? how much of a damn amateur are you?

^Probably not worth acknowledging or replying to this, but I wanted to point out that here, you're obviously trolling.

You know I already searched the web for the best res version, in the first place, before I made the thread, because that's implicit in the whole topic even existing, lol. The topic is studying the best-res version of the photo that I found online, before I made the thread, lol.



...

Now this is getting off-topic but I only realized earlier this year, that an image can be uploaded online, and it can be easily viewable and accessible, but... also NOT show up in Google searches.

This was in mid-March, I had found some wonderful specific photos, of my favorite beautiful model, and I had SEEN these specific photos of her, many years ago... but then they seemed to be taken down from the web, soon after I first saw them. This was around 2008 / 2009.

Many years passed and somehow, I found those pics in mid-March, 2021. It was on someone's blog website.

Yet even while looking at these pics online, I couldn't run a Google image-search that would actually see the same pics I was currently looking at. What's amazing is that I managed to stumble across those pics at all.

And so it was amazing to see this limitation though. I had always thought that if an image was factually posted online, then it would be findable / searchable, just because it's there.

But in March, there was Google Image search, laming out on being able to find this set of pics that was currently online, and I was currently looking at.

...

So as this relates to the actual topic, I think your higher-res version just didn't come up in my Google Image searches, before I made the thread.

My story about my favorite model, shows that online pics are not necessarily searchable & findable, even by Google, which certainly was a surprise to me, when I was seeing that, in March.

originally posted by: jedi_hamster
a reply to: JamesChessman

[qnip]

It doesn't prove that, and also, you're proving how lame it was that you apparently referred to filesize as RANDOM NUMBERS WITHOUT ANY LABEL.

You're also proving that you're deliberately vague, in announcing random numbers, specifically to be confusing, and then freak out that people didn't understand what exactly you were talking about, by your obvious intention to be confusing, lol.

originally posted by: jedi_hamster
a reply to: JamesChessman

Beyond all that, it's possible that your version wasn't even available online yet, when I made the thread...

And also, it's possible that it was already uploaded online, but for whatever reason, that version image just didn't turn up when I was image-searching, at the time.

[

snip]

Well now, you've run out of pretending to have anything to talk about, and it's all name-calling like a 5-year old.

Thanks for the contributions to the thread lol. But I was hoping you'd specify which file type was best out of the several choices that I'm given in Preview, I can save images as PNG but why not the other handful of choices? Hmm?

So when I read the original story, it said they were gonna get closer to take a better picture. Any update on that?

originally posted by: face23785
So when I read the original story, it said they were gonna get closer to take a better picture. Any update on that?

Hmm well in early December, when the Mystery House itself was breaking news: I was searching for everything about it, online.





So first, I thought I saw an estimate that it would take 1 month for the rover to reach the Mystery Hut.

Then, within a couple days: a new estimate that it would take 3 MONTHS for the rover to reach the Mystery Hut.




So I'm not sure if the estimate changed, or if I had misunderstood my first impression.

But either way: We're apparently waiting 3 months for the rover to reach the Mystery House.




And 3 months from early December is early March, 2022.

^So AFAIK, we can expect the Chinese rover to reach the House in early March.





So it seems framed as if the world is WAITING for that...

HOWEVER, if you think about this long enough, there seems no practical reason for that long waiting period... before new content is published.

It's really a completely separate topic that the rover may take 3 months to slowly drive up to it.

Regardless of when it physically reaches the House: This has nothing to do with it taking photos lol.

The thing could be spitting out photos to the public, all day long, every day of those 3 months, if China wanted to do that.






So now I realize that it all seems quite secretive, and blatantly so.

Unless something is getting lost in translation, which is possible: But I believe the world is waiting 3 months to see new photo's, which coincides with the rover reaching the House, but it seems totally arbitrary that we're waiting for new pics, at all.

Because the 3 month drive could be publishing new pics every day. Imagine how great it would be for 90 days of new pics published everyday, which show the Mystery House getting larger as it draws nearer. Wow that would be cool.

Instead we seem to be in a 3-month dead time of arbitrarily waiting for new pics, once it gets there.








Also: As mentioned before:

I realize now that there have really only been TWO photos published online so far. (Three, but one is just a zoom-in, on 1 of the 2.)

Only the landscape shot that I made my vid and this thread about. And the close up shot with the background cropped and blacked out.




So it seems really up-in-the-air, what direction China will be going, with future photo's of the Mystery House.

We only have one pic that's blacked-out, and one that seems deliberate to show hidden buildings.



Maybe China hasn't even decided yet, what direction to take, whether showing us secret knowledge, or blacking it all out. Maybe the 2 pics show us that it's a 50/50 chance, either way, lol.

Fingers crossed...

Oh also:

Google Earth:

Looking at the moon, it doesn't work to attempt to search ANY terms from the Chinese space agency, whatsoever.



So wow, talk about secrecy. I can digitally look over the moon on my desk, but also, I can't search a single thing associated with the Mystery House, or the Chinese rover, or the Chinese space agency, etc.



Someone tell us if you have more luck with this!


But so far, it would seem that China is deliberately keeping their involvements on the moon, as secretive / hidden from Google...?

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I couldn't find a single mention of anything related to China, in Google Earth, looking at the moon.




(It's also possible that it just wasn't working when I tried...)




And then considering that the actual coordinates of the Mystery House seem to be unknown... wow everything seems secret, the more we look into it!!

a reply to: jedi_hamster

Yo I just checked your link:

Your link is practically disinformation. What's up with that?

jishin-yogen.com...
blog-imgs-135.fc2.com...

that's a different version. may seem like a higher quality one, but it's same crap. when you'll brighten it, you'll see roughly same compression artifacts, meaning the source of those artifacts is the same.

it is higher resolution though. did someone upscale it? or maybe it's closer to the source image than the one you've used? how can you claim your version is the highest quality one released when you didn't even bother doing reverse image search using google? how much of a damn amateur are you?

First of all:

Were you aware of the appearance of the image at your link? Because if so, then you deliberately posted to garbage, and disinformation?

Your link's image quality is SEVERELY DOWNGRADED, and has DETAILS EDITED OUT.

And editing out certain details like that, can only be a deliberate effort, to do exactly that: To remove the most curious details of the image. For example, the right side skyscraper shape, now lacks the very prominent dark window in its small look-out, on top of the roof.

It's absolutely NOT a matter of losing details from any type of process, automatically, because while it's obviously severely downgraded in resolution quality: Even that can't make a dark spot vanish, as we see there.



...Who in the world would CUT OUT THE DETAILS from a lunar rover photograph, and then post it online?

And why in the world would you link to that disinformation, of all things?








Anyway it's a larger image, so it's more pixels, so at a glance at the info it would seem the highest res version, but once you look, it's a very low-res version, regardless the number of pixels, and it's crystal-clear that someone deliberately CUT out the interesting details.

Why did you post to that, of all things?

Do you know who made that trash, disinfo version of the photo?

TO BE FAIR:

The linked website ALSO has links to accurate version of these images on Twitter.

jishin-yogen.com...

So idk really what sense that makes. They embedded two blatantly trashed versions of the 2 pics, but also, they posted links to accurate pics, too.









...But if someone was in a country that doesn't allow Twitter -- and I don't know if China does allow it, or not -- but in the hypothetical of a place blocking Twitter, then the linked website would show its embedded TRASHED versions of the pics, only (if the Twitter link was blocked).

I don't know anything beyond just reporting what I can see on my screen, that it has embedded 2 blatantly trashed versions of these 2 pics, along with links to legit versions on Twitter.






To describe the blatant destructive edits of the 2 pics:



BOTH have been blatantly, deliberately downgraded, in total resolution quality, PLUS it's clear that they were also personally edited by hand, too, apparently.

The landscape shot was carefully, arbitrarily DELETED of the most interesting spots. This is absolutely a personal process, by hand.




The close-up shot shows the overall downgrade, and in the original published version: the background was already blacked out, as I showed already. Now here in this trash version, there's the total downgrade, plus some weird coloring added in that empty, blacked-out background.

It looks like they were trying to make up for some of the imagery that should be faintly visible in the background, but it's not, in the solid black / purple, seen in the mainstream published close-up shot.



...



Honestly this is like a funny episode of the Twilight Zone, lol.

It's like a funny TV show plot, which I wouldn't think would happen in real life. But it is, lol.




I'm wondering if this is worth making a vid about, or not, that I found these blatantly destroyed versions of the 2 pics. I don't know if that's really interesting or not, lol.


I could also embed the trashed versions of the pics, here in the forum, but again, I'm not quite sure how worthy this is of being focused on, and bringing more attention, besides how I just explained what I found in the public internet.

Also, can anyone tell me more about what this website really is? I can see it's a blog of some kind but much of the text doesn't translate, and I don't really know what I'm looking at here. Can anyone tell me more about the site, especially as pertaining to where did these trashed versions seem to come from, and why does it seem they were posted online?

a reply to: JamesChessman

What we need, someone to take photos of buildings on dark background and test how it compress and compare that to photo of plain background when compressed.

Try copying this into your browser mate

r.search.yahoo.com...=Awr9KKyEts9htXEAQxvpQyE5;_ylu=Y29sbwNncTEEcG9zAzEEdnRpZAMEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1641031429/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fwww.marsan omalyresearch.com%2f/RK=2/RS=Yclda6HDSmSjFabM1IlAPWEqDvE-

a reply to: JamesChessman

a reply to: JamesChessman

It's posts such as this one that make this forum worthy of a visit rather than for the present mundane posts. It's interesting and I viewed the footage at space.com and I have a problem with the discovery because of these comments: "China’s Yutu 2 rover has spotted a mystery object on the horizon while working its way across Von Kármán crater on the far side of the moon."

If Yutu 2 is working its way across the crater then we should see the crater's rim on the horizon as seen in www.cloudynights.com... and we don't. And here at 0:54: www.youtube.com...

So where is this "hut" really located? A crater is a bowl filled almost to the bottom of the rim.