PHOTO: The Moon, Like You've Never Seen It Before

Originally posted by Aggie Man
If you think that is spectacular, then check this one out.

www.rc-astro.com...

BTW, S&F

Indeed! Your link is even more spectacular! Very inspiring, dreamy pictures. Thanks for the contribution!

Agreeing with everybody else, 2 awesome lunar pictures posted on this thread. Thanks to both of you. I'm normally not a huge fan of false color imagery, but the moon really comes to life when it's utilized correctly.

Appreciative,
Strype

Here is the one from The Living Moon. It was taken by a man named Mike from his Backyard in East London, Great Britain:



(Image Credit: Mike Deegan of Mike's Astroimaging )

More about the image here:

www.thelivingmoon.com...

[edit on 10-12-2009 by Exuberant1]

Tell me something, that photo of the colored moon, does anyone not see what appears to be a TOWER located center of moon, 2 inches down from top of planet? I copied the pic and zoomed in and out, does not look like its on surface, with bits and pieces making it appear to be something its not.

anyway, really surprised no one mentioned it....let me know what ya think

www.rc-astro.com...

[edit on 10-12-2009 by ganbuzz]

[edit on 10-12-2009 by ganbuzz]

[

[edit on 10-12-2009 by ganbuzz]

Nice pics , but;

I would like to raise the questions some other posters have mentioned. Why no spectactular close ups? I have a crappy back yard telescope. I get even clearer imagery of the moon than these. Ok the colour thing is new but I can see the moon even clearer than presented in these pics.

Also a few weeks back I was looking at something else in the sky and decide to have a look at the moon. Don't usually look at it much because there is often not a lot going on. What i seen blew me away. All i can say is it looked like a massive flaw on the surface of the moon. It just made the moon look fake to me. I looked at loads of images of the moon on file to try and match it up with something similar and failed. It looked like part of the surface was peeling back.

Anyway enough of that. Nobody would believe me unless I could show them and I can't so thats that.

I am quite sure though that NASA have much better pics they could be showing us.




Peace.

[edit on 10-12-2009 by itstheendoftheworldaswekn]

Hold on a tic, what's that I read?

On the upperleft is the dark, lava-filled Mare Imbrium, Mare Serenitatis (middle left), Mare Tranquillitatis (lower left), and Mare Crisium, the dark circular feature toward the bottom of the mosaic. Also visible in this view are the dark lava plains of the Marginis and Smythii Basins at the lower right. The Humboldtianum Basin, a 400-mile impact structure partly filled with dark volcanic deposits, is seen at the center of the image.

Since when did the moon have volcanos?

Gee...nothing new here.

When you manipulate photos you can do all sorts of things.

www.jpl.nasa.gov...

reply to post by dashen


Volcanos -> big deal

You know its full of water now too.

Water is life.
We are mostly water.

India declares this year it has detected load of water on moon.

NASA respond, 'oh yeah we knew that just wanted to confirm it with recent impact' , 'we didn't want to say anything before because we thought our figures were wrong.' d'uh

NASA knows a hell of a lot more than they have ever told us.

Moon is full of water => therefore moon is full of life



Peace

reply to post by dashen

Since when did the moon have volcanos?

Oh, about 3 billion years ago, give or take a few hundred million.

The deep mantle and core of the Moon have long been dormant. Activity was likely quite brisk, early after its formation, until it cooled enough to become quiescent.

No erosion, remember? Well...bombardment by trillions of tiny micrometeorites over the eons, but hardly gonna change the landscape much, not like wind, rain and snow on Earth will. Also, Earth is still quite geologically active, lots of heat in the core, the crust constantly moving, shifting, subducting, reforming. Not so, the Moon.

reply to post by itstheendoftheworldaswekn

You know its full of water now too.

Huh? You reading the same science articles I am?

IF you think that the possiblity of extracting about a litre of water for every, oh....10 cubic metres of rock and soil means the Moon is "full of water", then that's your definition of "full", I guess. (Rough estimates, back-of-the-envelope in my head calculations...AND, this is only near the poles, where they never get any direct sunlight).
____________________________________________________________

How much?

Based on the measurements, the team estimated about 100 kilograms of water in the view of their instruments — the equivalent of about a dozen 2-gallon buckets — in the area of the impact crater (about 66 feet, or 20 meters across) and the ejecta blanket (about 60 to 80 meters across)...

www.space.com...



[edit on 10 December 2009 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by weedwhacker


My mistake, I thought the NASA site was referring to ACTIVE volcanos.

The three to 2.5 billion old ones I was aware of.

reply to post by weedwhacker


no , just in relation to it previously having none.

nice!, thanks for the link!!


but i have seen the moon like this before..

right here on ATS actually...
before i signed up ..

heres the link...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

the OP in that thread is awesome!

and this was done by man on earth!! lol

nasa better step it up.. still!



thanks again.

Originally posted by DangerDeath
They've kept it in secret since 1992? Why?

Edit: year (memory allocation problem

)

[edit on 9-12-2009 by DangerDeath]

Kept what a secret? That the universe is made up of colours? They didn't.

But enhancing and combining different images to highlight the actual colours, does not mean that they are as vibrant to the eye.

It's like saying "How come they kept atoms from us!" when we first saw them at a microscopic level. Atoms were always there, but we only see them with enhanced imagery.

Originally posted by Fromabove

Originally posted by Reevster
Yes its a nice picture....but why are all the pictures so far away, why cant we see close up ? With all the tech that we have we should be able to see within a few meters above the surface by now.

You ask what is the ,ost important question I could ever think of. Why is it when you attempt to do a close up, it breaks up. What is it they wish to hide. I wish there was someone willing to let us see close ups. They do this with Mars as well.

They don't want you to see the aliens houses in the craters where they sit around campfires and hoping we dont bomb them anymore.

Are you not up with the facts, or what?

Oh and when they can finally get every spot on earth within a few meters, let me know. I'll really send google a nasty email then! Took years to get Perth all into streetview, also.. Slow, considering we have the technology to map the entire moon to a few meters.. coh!



[edit on 10/12/2009 by Ha`la`tha]

Best some things kept just for nightmares !!



[edit on 10/12/2009 by Ha`la`tha]

Graet pictures...both of them. Am i right to see some old hexa-craters on there?

This one looks to have drainage patterns leading into or out of the crater.

www.rc-astro.com...

reply to post by ganbuzz


A Tower? Where? Show me.