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

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Well to some extent, your statements are probably true, because I do think that the brightened JPG is the most interesting, mysterious image.

In part because of the JPEG artefacts...

I think it's fair to say that we can't even get a sense of the texture of the boulder shot, from the painful low-resolution, and the blotchy weird colors, which can probably be blamed on the sunshine glaring really bright.

I can.

I can't even decide what the texture is supposed to be, do you think it has a sandy texture? As it might look like? Or do u think it has a smooth surface, like a real normal smooth boulder on Earth?

To me it looks like it has a pitted surface that is somewhat smoothed, not that different from other Moon rocks.

Wow, Ok, you nailed it.

That is actually incredibly similar to the boulder-shot image. Thanks for posting, I had not seen that before.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Don't you think that the brightened landscape shot... is really showing the shape of the boulder / mysterious object?

Or do you think that the red outlines are really ONLY showing nothing but artifacts?

In the image below I think it shows both the shape of the boulder and the surrounding JPEG artefacts, making the object appear bigger than it really is.

a reply to: JamesChessman

I like geology, I have been looking at rocks for many years.

originally posted by: ArMaP

^Also that 2nd rock bears a striking resemblance of an artificial shape. Unless it was cut by NASA?

It's practically almost an arrow-head or diamond shape.

But then also, the right side looks possibly shiny, like maybe NASA just cut through it, on that side... so maybe it was more of a rectangular rock that NASA cut into an almost-diamond shape?

Pretty bizarre, whichever way it's interpreted lol.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Don't you think that the brightened landscape shot... is really showing the shape of the boulder / mysterious object?

Or do you think that the red outlines are really ONLY showing nothing but artifacts?

In the image below I think it shows both the shape of the boulder and the surrounding JPEG artefacts, making the object appear bigger than it really is.

Ok but so you think the red outlines are really not outlining anything, but artifacts?

You think only the bright "face" of the object, is the only real thing?

a reply to: JamesChessman

Mostly artefacts.

JPEG works in 8 x 8 pixel blocks, so if one or two pixels occupy one of those blocks the JPEG compression algorithm will use them and it will "spread" them to the rest of the block.

The final result would be like selecting the object but adding a margin of, for example, 5 pixels.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: JamesChessman

Mostly artefacts.

JPEG works in 8 x 8 pixel blocks, so if one or two pixels occupy one of those blocks the JPEG compression algorithm will use them and it will "spread" them to the rest of the block.

The final result would be like selecting the object but adding a margin of, for example, 5 pixels.

I understand...

Well anyway then that's at least some new better clarity of the whole topic.

I thought the red outlines were actually showing real objects. Whether it was a boulder or a "moon hut."

Well that's why I was so excited about it, and that's why you were not excited about it.






^So I thought either way the red outlines were showing something physical. That's how I was interpreting it...



Well I can agree that it MIGHT just be light artifacts too. It's POSSIBLE, yes.

But it's also still worth considering if things might be what they look like, and I'd still think it looks like somthing's there, rather than nothing at all...


But hey, we don't really know.

Like I mentioned recently, the Mars flower topic became pretty clear, what it looks like, with about 25 hi-res images, on NASA's website repository of "raw" JPG images, from Mars.

^It's absolutely amazing, and the main point is that the Moon Hut topic would probably be clear too, if we got 25 hi-res images of it.

But so maybe eventually we'll see that happen though, maybe China is just taking their time.

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Well that's why I was so excited about it, and that's why you were not excited about it.

Even if it had a clear door and windows I don't think I would be much excited, at least not externally.

But it's also still worth considering if things might be what they look like, and I'd still think it looks like somthing's there, rather than nothing at all...

Look at the PNG instead of the JPG and see what's there.

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Well that's why I was so excited about it, and that's why you were not excited about it.

Even if it had a clear door and windows I don't think I would be much excited, at least not externally.

.

Why not?

I have wondered about how much interest you have in such topics, because I believe you're also a mod, as a job, and so you could possibly not really been interested in the forum topics...

Look at the PNG instead of the JPG and see what's there.

^Yes, indeed, the "big landscape JPG" is supposed to come from a very small, low-res PNG, with blotchy colors, and then apparently people loaded it with additional JPG artifacts.

It's absolutely not something I imagined when the topic began, with the large landscape JPG in the news, and "Purple Haze" too, I started out thinking that such images were the best, clearest images possible. Unfortunately...

Here's that baby-PNG, which is supposedly the "original," from which came the "giant JPG landscape shot" with all the extra artifacts, and also "Purple Haze" is supposed to come from it too, AFAIK.

It's disappointing that we never heard back from anyone re: how that process happened, between the original small PNG, and then news headlines blowing up with their own contrived versions of it...

originally posted by: JamesChessman
Why not?

Because that's how I am.

Being an asthmatic since I was at least 5 years old (when I had to go to the hospital for the first time in my life to get some oxygen), I learned to keep my emotions under control, as they could end up in an asthma attack, so I do not (usually) get excited with things that are directly and at that moment affecting me.

I have wondered about how much interest you have in such topics, because I believe you're also a mod, as a job, and so you could possibly not really been interested in the forum topics...

That's because you didn't read the message I sent you on 2022-06-14...

I joined ATS in 2004 like any other member, and my favourite topics were (and still are) Space Exploration, Aliens and UFOs, Science & Technology and other unusual events (although I do not frequent the Paranormal Studies or Ancient & Lost Civilizations, even if a post about Atlantis was the one that made me join the forum to make my first post).

Being a moderator came 5 years later (2009-10-08) and it's not a "job", we voluntarily spend some of our time helping moderate the boards. We do not stop being members because of that.

It's disappointing that we never heard back from anyone re: how that process happened, between the original small PNG, and then news headlines blowing up with their own contrived versions of it...

It is, I have had success contacting people in other cases, but this time nobody answered me...

If you apply the same brightening processes you used on the JPEG image you will see the difference.

originally posted by: JamesChessman

^Also that 2nd rock bears a striking resemblance of an artificial shape. Unless it was cut by NASA?

After looking for more information about it, that is one of the many pieces sample 15555 was cut into.

You can see/read more about it here.

a reply to: ArMaP

Because that's how I am.



Being an asthmatic since I was at least 5 years old (when I had to go to the hospital for the first time in my life to get some oxygen), I learned to keep my emotions under control, as they could end up in an asthma attack, so I do not (usually) get excited with things that are directly and at that moment affecting me.

^Sounds good. I have grown up with asthma too but it wasn't really triggered by emotions, I eventually cleared it up with better food, and better living places, and taking a lot of hot showers to breathe in the hot vapor.

However I need to better control my emotions in general anyway. Stress gives me muscle tension in my back and neck, so I stretch and do yoga, but everyone always can use more of that.

That's because you didn't read the message I sent you on 2022-06-14...

I joined ATS in 2004 like any other member, and my favourite topics were (and still are) Space Exploration, Aliens and UFOs, Science & Technology and other unusual events (although I do not frequent the Paranormal Studies or Ancient & Lost Civilizations, even if a post about Atlantis was the one that made me join the forum to make my first post).

Being a moderator came 5 years later (2009-10-08) and it's not a "job", we voluntarily spend some of our time helping moderate the boards. We do not stop being members because of that.

^I guess I must have missed the past message, and I'm glad to hear that you are interested in the forum topics. It was just something I had wondered.

Because sometimes people have jobs that they don't actually have interest in. I'm glad you do.

If you apply the same brightening processes you used on the JPEG image you will see the difference.

Well yeah, the baby-PNG does look quite different from the giant-JPG. It doesn't require brightening it, but maybe I should, just to show the difference better?

I know I talked a lot about such differences. Mainly the baby-PNG has SEVERAL STARS which DON'T survive the conversion to the giant-JPG full of artifacts.

It's less than fully convincing that it's really the original image that became the giant-JPG, but hey, nobody responded to explain things, so that's really how the topic is exhausted.

I also never imagined that news agencies would be taking a small PNG and then needlessly editing it, including loading up JPG artifacts. But again, hey, that's how the topic is exhausted, after no one responded to explain things better.

The giant-JPG that initially blew up in news headlines:



The wittle-baby-PNG that is supposed to be the original image, with MORE STARS than the JPG, and blotchy colors:

originally posted by: JamesChessman
^I guess I must have missed the past message, and I'm glad to hear that you are interested in the forum topics. It was just something I had wondered.

It was a private message. You can read them here.

By the way, for what it's worth: I noticed something re: The source of the famous "Image 2: Purple Haze."




For a little while, in the past: We could not find its original source, in some past discussion. And also, apparently I had botched the copy-paste of my links, so I broke its link.

(Soon we figured it out, that I had just copy-pasted it wrong. And so we soon clarified its web address.)



Well so anyway, I was glancing at some of my older videos, and I noticed that the WEB ADDRESS of its source, was actually shown in my video, all along.

So the source was never actually lost, I had just messed up the copy-paste, apparently, and then also, I forgot that the web address was probably shown in my video, too.


I had actually made a point of showing web addresses in my videos, when I can, just for as much clarity as possible. (But not all web addresses will actually work out, to be shown within a vid, like that.)

So we didn't realize it, but my vid made it impossible to lose the web addresses lol.

You can see/read more about it here.

^Thanks, I actually did already read about it, shortly after you posted it. But then I just didn't mention it because I thought it was probably boring to mention it.

But anyways, thanks, it's def. fascinating, just like everything related to the moon and space.

And also, yes, I read that NASA did cut through it, to form that diamond-like shape.

I was also surprised that these rock samples are EXTREMELY SMALL, because at first I was interpreting them as much bigger. But apparently these samples are within the range of a couple inches of size! Def. not how I was first interpreting the images (before reading its actual small size).

It appears after a year the original pictures have been uploaded to the Chinese website:
moon.bao.ac.cn.../PCAM/level/2B&year=2021

It is up to date to 9 December 2021. I think the moon hut pictures are most likely from around the 1 December date. Don't have time however to download and look at them all now....

So these should only contain the very early ones, the closer up ones should probably be published in a few months too.