Okay, I'm starting to loose my place here. Can you relink the map please? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><br /><img id="06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/6/14/06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /></p> </div>
- Status
I was just perusing the LPI maps for AS17 and also found a red dot on sheet 1 (of 8). It was off the track of any of the orbits and not in a region that was photographed. My guess is that the maps were marked (crosses indicating track and pic # and approx regions photo'ed) using a pen plotter. The dots, of various colors, are where the pen plotter set the pen down, whilst not moving, for some reason. The dots are just artifacts of the pen plotter programming. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
<font color="yellow">Okay, I'm starting to loose my place here. Can you relink the map please? </font><br /><br /><br />A link to all the maps is here. I think we've mostly been using map #4 (of 8) in our duscussion of the "anomaly" and red dot. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
* The dots are just artifacts of the pen plotter programming.<br /><br />Entirely possible. <br /><br />But if you do further checkings, somebody already suggested the brown dot might have something. I have not checked that.
* according to the map you provided can you give it in<br />* lat/long<br /><br />It would be easier to just open up the map in Photoshop, and just use the info palette to locate the X,Y pixel coordinates. <br /><br />If yours does not show pixles, use the arrow button on the palette to change the scale to pixels.<br /><br />Then you can use search in LPI website for the closest named region.<br />
<font color="yellow">that sounds like a fair assestment <br />I remember in my life time some really great network diagrams trashed from when the pen touched down in a remote area.</font><br /><br />And the scary part is that there are "kids" reading this who are probably asking "What's a pen plotter ?" <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
<font color="yellow">What's a pen plotter ?</font><br /><br /><img src="/images/icons/laugh.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <strong><font color="#3366ff">Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will to strive, to seek, to find and not to yeild.</font> - <font color="#3366ff"><em>Tennyson</em></font></strong> </div>
Brown dot is where the "mothership" (ridge) is in image 9625.<br /><br />http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/images/browse/AS15/P/9625.jpg<br />
So the discussion continues. A red dot and a brown dot in the same area. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#0000ff"><em>William ( deapfreeze ) Hooper</em></font></p><p><font size="1">http://deapfreeze-amateur-astronomy.tk/</font></p><p> </p> </div>
Yes, if you check it, the brown dot is only a few pixels away from the "Apollo-20" ridge.<br /><br />Here is hi-light: http://www.zweg.com/dump/photo/browndot.jpg
I think the brown dot confirms, that anomalies are marked on the maps.<br /><br />Some dots could be plotter artifacts, but we now have already 2 dots in close proximity to a anomaly.
Errrr let me see if I have this right. The red dot indicates something on the Moon, even though it's kms away from the anomaly seen in pic 2159 from AS17. This anomly doesn't show up in other pics because it's been photochopped out but left in 2159 (and marked with a red dot on a map) because some insider was leaving "us" clues. A brown dot in a AS17 map also marks the location of an anomaly caught in an AS15 pic. Any other dots are just dots because .... what .... the insider didn't want to be too obvious ?<br /><br /><br /><br />The above is more likely than dust/lint in the photo scanned, a ridge and pen plotter drops.<br /><br /><br /><br />Is it New Years Eve already where you are ? <br /><br /><br />EDIT : spellin & granma<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
Yes, I'm heading out in 15 minutes (9 pm).<br /><br />As mentioned before, the first anomaly could be spaceborne, hence the sighting and actually taking the photo might be from a bit different location. This would explain why the anomaly only shows in 1 photo, i.e. 2159.<br /><br />This could be something, or nothing. Needs more evidence for any real conclusions.
<font color="yellow"> but we now have already 2 dots in close proximity to a anomaly. </font><br /><br />I still haven't seen any real evidence from you that these are "anomalies" instead of routine, natural artifacts. So without any "proof" that these "anomolies" are anything other than a rock formation and floating debris..the proximity of a random dot on a map means zippo. <br /><br /><i>to add</i><br /><br />I am sure, if I looked hard enough, I could find an "anomoly" in close proximity to every dot on the map.
LSBD - for once we agree on something. 
<div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> No amount of belief makes something a fact" - James Randi </div>
<div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> No amount of belief makes something a fact" - James Randi </div><font color="yellow">Yes, I'm heading out in 15 minutes (9 pm). <br /></font><br /><br />Well then have a good time ! Down a pint or 5 for me. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br /><br />I'll be stuck here, looking after the sick wife. Hmmm, mebbe I should be starting early ....<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>
Thanks! Happy New Year, everybody! <br /><br />Maybe we'll stumble upon a interesting phenomena in 2008?
Just sow I know that I'm on the same page, is this the Red Dot you are referring too?<br /><br />http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v607/Bearack/redDot.jpg <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><br /><img id="06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53" src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/6/14/06322a8d-f18d-4ab1-8ea7-150275a4cb53.Large.jpg" alt="blog post photo" /></p> </div>
* I am sure, if I looked hard enough, I could find an<br />* "anomoly" in close proximity to every dot on the map.<br /><br />I want to comment on this (in a hurry), I didn't work in that order.<br /><br />First I saw anomalies, only after that started to look if there was references to anomalies. Suprise, there was.<br /><br />The people who worked for the spaceprogram(s) are almost as bright as we are <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> , they know they'd be in trouble if they tried to hide evidence. So they need to use code, like something that appears a bit like... a plotter dot?<br /> <br />Edit: warning! Contains sarcasm plus speculation.
* Just sow I know that I'm on the same page, is this the Red<br />* Dot you are referring too?<br /><br />No, that would be a new dot. Thanks for that.<br />
You know, I did say earlier that I was more than a bit dismayed at the sweeping assumptions being made in this. I still am, and have been reading them going on and on. An entire woof of fabric woven out of a few colored dots.<br /><br />There are any number of reasons for the presence of those dots, only one or two of which have been mentioned, and numerous of which have been arbitrarily - and I mean <b>arbitrarily</b> - discounted.<br /><br />You clearly stated early on in this thread that you have little if no expertise in the fundamental sciences underlying this subject. Ok, fair statement by you, and thank you for the honesty. However...<br /><br />Example: do you know what an "Altitude Benchmark" is? It is a geographic point chosen for use as an altitude reference, so that later image processing and analysis may be accurate and in the right perspective and alignment.<br /><br />It's notable that there are multiple colors for those "anomalous" dots - do you note that their color conforms to the colors utilized to indicate the path of the vehicle for each path over that swath of terrain?<br /><br />Then consider that a red dot is likely the altitude benchmark for the orbital path traced out in red. And it does not have to be directly at or necessarily near the terrain being imaged.<br /><br />Also, Mee_and_Mac (IIRC that was who mentioned it) commented on plotter artifact, from when the pen drops and touches the image. This is a <i>known</i> issue from back when, and is a perfectly valid explanation.<br /><br />I'd further like to grieve that you keep referring to a few colored dots as "evidence." You are not even, in a rigorous, scientific analysis sense, close to "evidence." More like "vague speculation." In the environment I was schooled in, your assertations would not have been listened to, as there is no scientific rigor to them.<br /><br />Sorry this sounds a bit harsh, but it is the simple truth.<br /><br />Let me explain a few standards to you, so that this discu <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Differential Diagnosis: </em>"<strong><em>I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are</em></strong>."<br /> </p> </div>
APHH:<br />What about 2nd, secret, space program? <br /><br />The U.S. military and NRO have been sending up huge rockets for decades now with little information about the payload or destination. Heck, the Soviets tried to launch some sort of huge battle-station in the 80ies called Polyus with unknown capabilities. <br /><br />Certainly governments can keep secrets, if they wish to do so. Sometimes something is leaked, but not always.<br /><br />Me:<br />Can you provide more specifics on these huge rockets? I realize the government can hide a lot of stuff, but huge rocket launchings is not one of them. Are we talking the well known Titan-IVs here or huge Saturn class LVs?<br /><br />I'll cite you an example:<br /><br />The Soviet rocket facility at Plesetsk which was uncovered in 1965 or 66 by a teacher and his class. Called the Kettering group, they revealed the presence of Plesetsk because not only could they see the moderately sized LVs leaving there...they could track their ascent and backtrack them to the launch location.<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_Perry<br /><br />The largest rocket in the U.S. inventory dedicated to secret payloads is the Titan-IV and some of its payloads are known to some degree. The Soviet era Polyus satellite launched May 15, 1987 astride an Energia rocket and speculation ranged from a star wars battle station to commercial factory.<br /><br />We have a classified military space capability to be sure...but its not that secret. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>
* I am sorry I am putting my (size 12) foot down here, but<br />* this debate will go nowhere without adherence to those<br />* standards.<br /><br />I've said time after time that the next step would be to see if there is a correlation between the imaged anomalies and the dots on the map. There is no way we could determine that here for certain.<br /><br />They just happen to be in close proximity, which was enough to spark my interest, because it's not like there are a lot of dots on the map. <br /><br />I am not suggesting anymore research is done on this. It was interesting phenomena, but not enough to validate further study. <br /><br />Edit: added word PHENOMENA
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 188
-
-
Definition of Universe requires clarification, to enable discussion
- Started by Catastrophe
- Replies: 38
-
You can now wear an Apollo Guidance Computer keypad as a wristwatch
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 0
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram