Mars the anomalies The moon too.

mental_avenger · Jul 12, 2007

"missing data", how are the images received, do they scan from top left to bottom right, you know, a bit like old T.V tube cathode ray to form the image ? Is the image data loss from the transmission end or in between or the receiving end. The imaging, transmitting, receiving, and subsequent construction of the images is relatively complex. I have provided detailed explanations before. Here is a simplified version. The CCD image unit is scanned in the downtrack direction. Since the spacecraft is moving, the image is slightly skewed in that direction. The data is stored in a buffer, and later transmitted to Earth. The data is raw data, very very raw. It consists of pixel gray-scale (or color) information, relative pixel location, and time data. The data is received and stored in a buffer. There are between 5 and 12 steps required to manipulate the data to the point where it produces and image that we can see. Most people do not realize the complexity of this part of the process. This is where an image is transformed from the â€œcatboxâ€ type image to an image that looks like the actual site to a human eye. Also note that there is often either an overlap, or a gap, between two images that are of adjacent areas on the surface of a planet (or moon). In the case of an overlap, all the data is retained. In the case of a gap, the data is sometimes interpolated in an attempt to provide a continuous image. If you really are interested, and want more detailed information, I can provide it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space. </div>

mental_avenger · Jul 12, 2007

pierround: It depends on who "they is", what if it was camouflage? You seem to have missed the point of my post. Did you notice the editing I performed on the image? I used Ulead PhotoImpact to create a nearly seamless replacement of the left-hand â€œblurredâ€ area with terrain that looks like it belongs there. If I can use a program that came free with my printer to do that, imagine what the experts with sophisticated programs can do. If they really were attempting to hide something, it is unrealistic to think they would simply blur the area in question, which would only raise more questions from those who are watching their every move. No, they would edit the image in such a way that no one would have any reason to take a second look. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Our Solar System must be passing through a Non Sequitur area of space. </div>

qso1 · Jul 12, 2007

Rather than blur an image to avoid answering some question, wouldn't it be easier to just not publish it at all? Your case might actually be stronger if you'd put up the original source imagery as a comparison to the image of interest. I always see the images as they apparently are at sites like EM or Hoagland sites but never with an original. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> My borrowed quote for the time being: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. </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 12, 2007

Rocks? Why would they have to answer for them? They didn't put them there <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

3488 · Jul 12, 2007

I agree MeteorWayne. They are ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!! Nothing more & nothing less. Andrew Brown. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "I suddenly noticed an anomaly to the left of Io, just off the rim of that world. It was extremely large with respect to the overall size of Io and crescent shaped. It seemed unbelievable that something that big had not been visible before". Linda Morabito on discovering that the Jupiter moon Io was volcanically active. Friday 9th March 1979.http://www.launchphotography.com/ http://anthmartian.googlepages.com/thisislandearthhttp://web.me.com/meridianijournal </div>

zenonmars · Jul 12, 2007

M_A: "If I can use a program that came free with my printer to do that, imagine what the experts with sophisticated programs can do." <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> Ya got that right brother! M_A: "If they really were attempting to hide something, it is unrealistic to think they would simply blur the area in question" No. Sometimes they "airbrush" stuff, too! <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" /> Here are 2 differing versions of the same frame of film, found misfiled in the Goddard and Johnson SC "public" archives: http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/reflec1.jpg Jon: "Zen - why be still believes Hoagland after such palpable nonsense about 50 km towers that somehow escaped observation for 400 years and can be seen only in dodgy reproductions of a single image from Zond 3." Really? Try this NASA image on for size: http://www.enterprisemission.com/images/c-stero2.jpg Amateur and professional astronomers alike have noted for decades a "light-scattering" phenomenon associated with the very edge of the moon. The Hoagland/Bera theory is that the main building blocks of these apparent ruins on our Moon, was in fact GLASS !!! Popular Mechanics has noted that glass made in a vacuum is stronger than steel. With the Moon's abundance of silica(sand), this would make perfect sense. The moon has no current vulcanism, or wind, or water erosion : in fact, the ONLY surface-altering phenomenon on our Moon, is the collision of objects crashing to it's surface from deep space. We can see the evidence of meteor impacts all over the moon. But what most folks don't <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

yevaud · Jul 13, 2007

Actually, Zen, I'd say the image you posted is imaged in UV, and the bright part merely has a high reflectance in that wavelength. Nothing more. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 13, 2007

Sounds like Mr. Butch was a friend? Sorry to hear that. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

yevaud · Jul 13, 2007

Thanks, Man. Known the guy almost 30 years. Been friends for around 7. In fact, I saw him the day before the accident. Crazy man. We all had a bad feeling about him getting a Moped. We were right. Damnit. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> Differential Diagnosis: "I am both amused and annoyed that you think I should be less stubborn than you are." </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Jul 13, 2007

Sorry about that Yevaud. I took a look at the link last night but didn't have time to comment on it. You know, I think there are far too many Mr. Butch's around. Someday, maybe we'll do something about it. But, there is one thing; Everyone seems to be richer having known him. You know, that really isn't a bad goal in life no matter what your economic station is. It seems that he achieved it. My condolences. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

pierround · Jul 13, 2007

Jon says, <blockquote>In reply to:<hr />pierre - why do lunar blocks look like construction material and why lack of data can only be interpreted as editting rather than.... lack of data. <hr /></blockquote> It's unlike any lack of data I have seen. Second I have been in construction most of my life and it appears to me to be parts of some form of building materials. Thirdly, I don't believe everything that our government tells us especially about weapons of mass destruction, or UFOs. Because I have seen and have heard and witnessed both of these things as they are reveled to the lucky and the person in the right place at the right time. Nixon didnâ€™t try to cover up anything either right? How about the JFK incident? Man if they are just rocks how do you recognize ruins? By the way the name is PIERROUND your spelling of editing is spelled wrong too. No offence but I don't buy it. The Moon is also some what hollow as per seismic testing which also adds to itâ€™s mystery. Kind of rings like a bell, or so I am told.

MeteorWayne · Jul 13, 2007

OK fine. "The Moon is also some what hollow as per seismic testing" Please show a scientific report of any kind that implies the moon is hollow. That please isn't really a request...show us a scientific report that indicates the moon is hollow. Or be quiet. WayneSquare <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Mee_n_Mac · Jul 13, 2007

It's unlike any lack of data I have seen. I think it would interesting to see the raw data and then the reconstructed data. Maybe all the missing data points should be left black in the future. Of course then the cry will be data omission to hide the "truth". Second I have been in construction most of my life and it appears to me to be parts of some form of building materials. ..... Man if they are just rocks how do you recognize ruins? MW has mentioned the fancy term before ... I'll let him attend to this. But before I'd leap to the conclusion that they're ruins I'd think I'd first rule out that they're just rocks that happen to look like ruins. Have you never seen natural formations that look to be man-made ? When we spot potential ruins using radar from the air, it isn't assumed they are ruins at that time. We send people there to have a looksee. In this case why aren't the astronauts, who saw the "ruins" with their own eyes claiming they're ruins. All I have to go on is one picture taken from 1 angle with 1 set of lighting. Thirdly, I don't believe everything that our government tells us especially .... Of course not but that doesn't mean everything every Gov't official or agency is then a lie or coverup. The Moon is also some what hollow as per seismic testing which also adds to itâ€™s mystery. Kind of rings like a bell, or so I am told. Huh ? I can take a chunk of solid metal and whack it with a hammer and it'll ring too. Vibrations and echoes in a material doesn't mean it's hollow. When the Moon is hit or has a moonquake the vibrations will "ring like a bell". Same thing happens http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_n25_v1</safety_wrapper <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -----------------------------------------------------Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, STOP ! </div>

pierround · Jul 14, 2007

My my aren't you demanding!

MeteorWayne · Jul 14, 2007

No, you made a statement which is patently ridiculous. I've asked you to provide some sliver of evidence to back it up. Sounds reasonable (and in line with SDC's Policies and Guidelines, BTW) to me. Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Jul 14, 2007

I usually prefer to believe everything anyone tells me. I'd write more on this but I'm getting ready to go visit a bridge I just bought in Los Angeles! I'm really excited. It's a big mohawkin' bridge too! /gets in car and speeds off <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

nimbus · Jul 14, 2007

You have to admit that with precedents like your assertions that ordinary image compression artifacts found on just a few out of many pictures of a certain place on the Moon are in fact alien infrastructure, you aren't completely credible. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 15, 2007

And I'm still waiting for some "hollow moon" evidence. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

dragon04 · Jul 15, 2007

A hollow Moon? It would be very interesting to see how proponents of a hollow Moon could mathematically explain the Moon's tidal effects and mechanics of its orbit based on such a thing. If we endeavor to say that the Moon is hollow, then we have to transfer it's known mass from its center to its crust and mantle. That would indicate to me that the Moon's composition consists of very different things than we're relatively certain of. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "2012.. Year of the Dragon!! Get on the Dragon Wagon!". </div>

zenonmars · Jul 15, 2007

Wayne, Ok, my jury is still out on 'hollow moon' and 'moon-as-construction' and 'moon-placed-perfectly-to-seed-life-on-Earth', but let me at least help these guys out by giving you the link you so vehemently crave: (AND YES I KNOW THERE ARE A GAZILLION EXPLANATIONS FOR THIS DATA, AND YES I AGREE THIS DATA ALONE DOES NOT PROVE ANYTHING, BUT PLEASE LOOK AT THE URL BELOW: at least I am not giving you a tin-hat, new-ager, hollow earth type site. So relax.) http://www1.jsc.nasa.gov/er/seh/pg15.htm Here it states: "Apollo 13 was headed homeward. Moments later the 15-ton spent third stage of the Saturn V launch vehicle crashed into the Moon, as planned. It occurred at 8:09 p.m. EST, April 14. The S-IVB struck the Moon with a force equivalent to 11 1/2 tons of TNT. It hit 85 miles west northwest of the site where the Apollo 12 astronauts had set up their seismometer. Scientists on Earth said, "the Moon rang like a bell." "Back in November 1969, the Apollo 12 astronauts had sent their Lunar Module crash- ing into the Moon following their return to the command craft after the lunar landing mission. That Lunar Module struck with a force of one ton of TNT. The shock waves built up to a peak in eight minutes and continued for nearly an hour. "The information from these two artificial moonquakes led to reconsideration of theories proposed about the lunar interior. Among puzzling features are the rapid build- up to the peak and the prolonged reverberations. Nothing comparable happens when objects strike Earth." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 15, 2007

Which really, without further analysis, inducates nothing. A large part of the earth's interior is plastic/molten. This is unlikely for the moon, except for a possible small area around a solid core. Nothing at all here is any evidence for a "hollow moon" which is what has been stated, and I am still waiting for evidence of. Is that what you are suggesting? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

pierround · Jul 15, 2007

<blockquote>In reply to:<hr />Or be quiet. WayneSquare <hr /></blockquote> Wait a minute one minute you say the earth does the same thing and now your saying it doesn't? Well which is it?

Mee_n_Mac · Jul 15, 2007

And from the same article ; "One theory is that the signal is scattered and repropagated in very deep rubble. An- other holds that the velocities of seismic waves from these impacts are comparable to meas- urements of velocities in crystalline rock. So the crystalline material which the astronauts found so abundant on the Moon's surface may extend very deep into the Moon. " So what is it they're refering to when they say; "Nothing comparable happens when objects strike Earth." The rapidity of the rise or the prolonged duration ? As I read it they aren't saying that seismic waves don't bounce about in the Earth (if/when hit hard enough), but that they are different, and different from expected due to the Moon's materials. The above paragraph doesn't mention hollowness at all. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -----------------------------------------------------Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, STOP ! </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Jul 15, 2007

That's what irks me about topics like this. People engage in selective reading, find points in respected literature/science that leave room for their idea and then post links to such articles alluding to the fact that the article supports their opinion. It's almost as if some people believe that others can't read. I'm not saying the article above was linked using such methodology or intent. But, it serves as an example why crackpots like RCH+crew are able to spread their garbage while flooding various topics with links to "mainstream supporting evidence" that are neither supporting of their claims nor serve as evidence. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

MeteorWayne · Jul 16, 2007

That message I replied to has nothing to do with the hollow moon you are suggesting. All I said was that earth has a large molten interior, and the moons molten layer, if any, is quite small. Menwhile, got any evidence to support a hollow moon? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> But the Krell forgot one thing John. Monsters. Monsters from the Id. I really, really, really, really miss the "first unread post" function </div>

Mars the anomalies The moon too.

mental_avenger

Guest

mental_avenger

Guest

qso1

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

3488

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

yevaud

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

yevaud

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

pierround

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Mee_n_Mac

Guest

pierround

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

nimbus

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

dragon04

Guest

zenonmars

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

pierround

Guest

Mee_n_Mac

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

MeteorWayne

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page