Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Assorted Apollo Anomalies
#1
Got a questionable item on an Apollo image?

Here's where you can get it checked.

Cheers
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#2
Hell, I'll even start it out.

This one will take a good bit of grok

I was digging through my archives, Apollo 10 in particular
and lo- what sticks up, but image AS10-31-4647. The photo was taken using the Hasselblad 500EL camera through a 250mm lens onto 70mm film.  
The image is pretty clear, and taken from an oblique angle.
I figure it's worth a look, not sure if I'd ever delved into it before.

 Of course, the scan I'm looking at is huge, roughly 4200x4200, and contains all kinds of features- beautiful if not anomalous in their own right- and in a favorable lighting, catching nice perspective details.
So, even if I had looked through it before I might not have noticed this crazy little scene.
I'm not sure what it is, but what it looks like; leaving me a bit perplexed, and that's saying something.

The photo I'm talking about can be seen on my website, but it is not the full res image I'm looking at for study. Nevertheless, the feature is visible on it.

http://www.keithlaney.net/ApolloOrbital ... 1-4647.jpg

Now one of the first things I do when I see something odd on early Apollo photos is to look around online to see if there are other copies of the same image that may be better or at least to some level proximal.
The Apollo 10 flight journal is one of those, and although a nice portion of the images in it are from my online collection, this was apparently not one of them, thus giving me two sources of the same photo.

http://history.nasa.gov/ap10fj/photos/3 ... 1-4647.jpg

This version is larger than the one I have online at my site, but far smaller than the scan I made it from, and of a slightly lower quality as well. Regardless, the object/s are also evident on it, plus something else that is very curious and not on my copy.

So, enough background. Let me get to showing this thing and quit teasing so I can get some feedback.

 If you look on either of the above images you'll see a large crater in the center. That's Godin.
look up the image just a small way from Godin and you'll see a small basin with hills around it- they are casting a somewhat parallel shadow.
Between them is the area I'm talking about.

This is what is there on the AS10 FJ's photo.

[Image: 4647-AS10fj-C1.jpg]

see the items?

[Image: 4647-AS10fj-C2.jpg]

Now here is the same scene from the image I have

[Image: 4647-kl1-C1.jpg]

[Image: 4647--kl1-C2.jpg]


What does this look like?

and what happened to the bright object in the shadows that is obvious on the AS10 FJ version?

Let me turn this up a bit.

[Image: 4647-kl1-C3.jpg]
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#3
I'm laughing because this is impossible, but - what if?

[Image: 4647-kl1-C4.jpg]
actually, I probably wasn't supposed to show ya'll that, but it's me on a moonwalk.
I left my triangular ship on top of the hill.
Rofl  <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/scream.gif" alt="Scream" title="scream" />
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#4
OK,
I'll bite.
The bottom dune appears as though it has a 'spike'.
The Spiky thing has a shadow at it's base that make it appear to be legs on an upright being.
We won't say it is, but it is something out-of-place in the context of the rest of image.
Now why one image contains a bright spot, and the other doesn't I'll leave to you imaging experts, and I'm sure many sound hypotheses will surface.
I got no opinion on how it could happen.
So, the words Autumn and Fall are not to be capitalized?
They are in my world!

What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; and there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there a thing of which it is said, "See, this is new?"It has been already, in the ages before us. Ecc 1: 9-10
Reply
#5
The bright spot is NOT missing on YOUR copy ... look closely.

Without even downloading it I can see the spot ... only it's a LOT less luminous.

Now of course it would be since the angle of the shots are different from each other ... and ...

the spot is completely a "thing" the rises UP (or UFO fade in/out) from the floor and pokes it's head into sunlight in one,

not the other.

The other two objects are indeed intriguing. Has LROC imaged it yet?

Bob... <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/reefer.gif" alt=":uni:" title="reefer" />
"The Morning Light, No sensation to compare to this, suspended animation, state of bliss, I keep my eyes on the circling sky, tongue tied and twisted just and Earth Bound Martian I" Learning to Fly Pink Floyd [Video: https://vimeo.com/144891474]
Reply
#6
whatever it is, I'm sure it's all not what it appears to be- and there are reasons.
The triangle shape appears to be sticking out of the top of the hill. It may be just a big piece of exposed rock sticking out of the shadows of a rise behind it.

the item on the bottom of the hill crest looks to me like someone in a space suit-
looks like is about all it does, because the thing is literally a hundred miles or so away

the item would be at least a couple, maybe several hundred feet tall- and those are just estimates.

as for the bright thing.
we see it is very obvious in the FJ image, but not or barely visible on mine.
I cropped the area from both photos, and adjusted the gamma to try and see what may be seen in the shadows
[Image: 4647--kl1-FJ-combo.jpg]

I'm guessing that for whatever reason it was painted out of my version- but they missed the other anomalies right beside it.

The FJ image is of lesser quality than mine, so reconcile that.
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#7
Several hundred feet tall!
That's one tall spire.

Would really, really be fun to have a close-up from ground level looking up!
So, the words Autumn and Fall are not to be capitalized?
They are in my world!

What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; and there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there a thing of which it is said, "See, this is new?"It has been already, in the ages before us. Ecc 1: 9-10
Reply
#8
more like antenna or smthng...
Reply
#9
From the Apollo 8 Onboard voice Transcription:-

03 16 44 39 LMP There's a strange light down there

03 16 44 45 CDR Is it a bonfire?

03 16 44 47 LMP It might be campfires.

They must have been joking, but I wonder what it is they were looking at?

Apollo 10 experienced weird 'music' over a VHF channel. From the Lunar Module Onboard Voice Transcription p195:-

04 06 13 16 CMP Did you hear that whistling sound too?


04 06 13 14 LMP Yes.Sounds like, you know, outer space type music.

04 06 13 18 CMP I wonder what it is.

04 06 13 20 LMP Hey Tom,is you insulation all burned off here, on the front side of your window over here?

04 06 13 27 CMR Yes.

04 06 13 34 LMP Mine's all burned off. Isn't that weird, eerie, John?

04 06 13 34 CMP Yes, I got it too... and see who was outside.

So, who was outside?
Reply
#10
Haven't reached a sufficient level of slobber yet. Hmm2

B. An element casting its own shadow

C. Nothing apparent to cast this shadow, but it’s there nonetheless Dunno
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.<br />Aldous Huxley
Reply
#11
a shadow is white in a negative image, reversing the entire perspective and turning craters into mounds

I do not agree with the entire concept of viewing images in the negative, that's asking for the photo to play tricks with one's eyes.

a better way to go about it is to determine the images orientation, sun angle etc first, then the craters make sense
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#12
Here' another one for ya.

Lens flare?

You tell me

http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/a410/AS10-28-3993.jpg


here's a smaller version

[Image: 3993.jpg]
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#13
and if you think that's something, what about this little item from AS10-29-4291?

[Image: as10-29-4291%20base.jpg]
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#14
So as you can see I can bust out convincing lunar anomaies all night.

This is something I've already made your mistakes on, discarded fantasy and decided to look with a scientific mind
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#15
This is something I've already made your mistakes on, discarded fantasy and decided to look with a scientific mind.

I take it you are referring to me, since no one else here ever makes mistakes, let alone admit to it. And now I’m also in a fantasy world of my own. Thanks for that Keith. Why do you find it necessary to do that?

Just a clarification before we move on.

I stated the same in my post: a shadow is white in a negative image. It also has no form whatsoever. And, as O2 reminded me:

As regards my anaglyph, I'm not sure what creating a negative is
supposed to show. I already did that with the originals and there
was nothing unusual that I could see, before I made the anaglyph.
Creating a negative is an automatic process but 999 time out of a 1000
doesn't reveal anything unusual that you can't see in the positive image.

This can also be seen in the following. The only effect is that black areas become white, white areas become black. The basic image remains intact. The shadows have no form, nor are they stacked on top of each other.

[Image: pos-neg.jpg]

Not sure the “turning craters into mounds” is accurate for obliques as can clearly be seen in the following side by side comparison. I have noticed that with some overhead shots when the image is rotated, particularly in the anaglyphs. But with this example, all the craters, hills, depressions can be seen. The only difference is where there were “shadows” those areas are now white.

[Image: sidebyside-2.jpg]

Ok, so you’re uncomfortable dealing with negatives. Scientifically, I can appreciate that. (Just consider the possibility that you are viewing a negative initially and not a positive)  Let’s look at some of the same areas in the regular image.


[Image: cropAreg.jpg]

[Image: cropBreg.jpg]

[Image: cropEreg.jpg]

And then there’s this additional area.

[Image: cropFreg.jpg]

There is some interesting geology here, if it is that.




You also wrote: So as you can see I can bust out convincing lunar anomaies all night.

What brought that on? Do you doubt that I know you have a fantastic collection of images many of which you’re probably hesitant to post because of your work? Thought this thread was for others.

But if this is your territory..........just let me know.

Will check out your other images in a bit.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.<br />Aldous Huxley
Reply
#16
negatives create the illusion of solid white from shadows.. the bright colored items around them are turned to black.
To use them to delineate anomalies will not hold water here with me nor with the anomalist community.
There are far better anomalistic things to spend your time on, unless you don't mind having those that have devoted good portions of their lives seeking not speculation, but concrete proof - to Label you pariah.

You are dealing with one of if not the most knowledgeable individual autodidact that ever researched the Apollo and Mars programs

and I am cantankerous after having dealt with manipulative coots all my lfe
show the respect and proper decorums I've earned and I may just tell you tales that would make Ali Baba pull his carpet over his eyes
But damn sure don't flood my best threads with nonsense- occasionally I will get cranky and make them simply disappear, along with their authors
as well might I remind you- This is not a public venue, this is a well beloved members only Hidden Forum, and us "buds" here have been through thick and thin- and for the most part remain far ahead of any scientific genre.
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#17
You got it boss.

Let's take a break. I know it's been a rough day.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.<br />Aldous Huxley
Reply
#18
AS10-28-3993 :- well if it isn't lens flare, how about that other grand old red herring reflection? It's a hand -held camera shot through a porthole and the light is a reflected instrument indicator light. Added to which it's nearly central in the image which it would have to be for it to be reflected. Pure coincidence that it appears to be attached to the surface feature, which may have been the target of the photo.

AS10-29-4291 :- I'm assuming it's the 'hole' in the side of the crater with the smaller holes evenly grouped around it. The dark lower 'limb' of the hole, stretching towards the crater shadow, is just a shadow of a groove , and the crater could be lined with such grooves all the way round from what little can be guessed at given the glare-out.
The same could be said of the surrounding holes, they aren't holes at all and neither are any of the other jet black spots of very similar size all over the image. Harsh film development or an overburned print,maybe? In fact there are that many black spots where you wouldn't expect shadows that dark it could just be some accident with the film developer.
Reply
#19
Quote:AS10-28-3993 :- well if it isn't lens flare, how about that other grand old red herring reflection? It's a hand -held camera shot through  a porthole and the light is a reflected instrument indicator light. Added to which it's nearly central in the image which it would have to be for it to be reflected. Pure coincidence that it appears to be attached to the surface feature, which may have been the target of the photo.

Quote: Not sure if lens flare works with that one, the sun angle was quite high and not in the window It does seem to have two spots that appear to the untrained eye as flare, but hasselblad flair is normally pentad. Perhaps an inner reflection from something in the craft-

but to beat all, it's just across the way from where that big thing seen on
http://history.nasa.gov/ap10fj/photos/2 ... 8-3988.jpg (supposedly a piece of mylar or something) was seen in the sky beside the craft..
perhaps looking back on it. 


Quote:AS10-29-4291 :- I'm assuming it's the 'hole' in the side of the crater with the smaller holes evenly grouped around it. The dark lower 'limb' of the hole, stretching towards the crater shadow, is just a shadow of a groove , and the crater could be lined with such grooves all the way round from what little can be guessed at given the glare-out.
The same could be said of the surrounding holes, they aren't holes at all and neither are any of the other jet black spots of very similar size all over the image. Harsh film development or an overburned print,maybe? In fact there are that many black spots where you wouldn't expect shadows that dark it could just be some accident with the film developer.

Quote:Nope, here's the print
http://history.nasa.gov/ap10fj/photos/2 ... 9-4291.jpg
The sun is coming from the upper center of the photos left, the black things are boulder shadows, and the light iss shining right into the ringed hole in the crater side.
This is one of the most artificial appearing Items I've ever seen on the moon.
Portal with ramp anyone?

of course, the above is the AS10 FJ version, (another they borrowed from me.)
too bad they didn't ask- my full res versions are just --better
this was a 'target of Opportunity, and is dead center of the photograph.

[Image: AS10-29-4291-close.jpg]
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#20
Re the image showing 'lens flare' at the top of the thread. Small, it looks like a solid, but greatly enlarged (as in the link) it resembles droplets of some kind adhering to the port. Vented astronaut urine perhaps!

Re controversy concerning negatives. The recently released lroc images of Nansen looked nothing like the orbital images released in the seventies, (as shown on your 'hidden mission A17' section) until I reversed and contrast adjusted them in my post, which made them virtually identical. I'd be interested in your opinion of this Keith. Had I created a negative from a positive? A positive from a negative? Or something in between? Which came first, and will the real Nansen please stand up? <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/dunno.gif" alt="Dunno" title="dunno" />
“Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason.” <br />Sir John Harrington
Reply
#21
when looking at something identifiably defined, viewing it in negative format might show a detail unseen in posi- however I wouldn't start a hunt by flipping an image into a neg and then wondering why it looks odd.
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#22
I reiterate-

Quote:[quote author="Bigfoot73"]AS10-28-3993 :- well if it isn't lens flare, how about that other grand old red herring reflection? It's a hand -held camera shot through  a porthole and the light is a reflected instrument indicator light. Added to which it's nearly central in the image which it would have to be for it to be reflected. Pure coincidence that it appears to be attached to the surface feature, which may have been the target of the photo.

Quote: Not sure if lens flare works with that one, the sun angle was quite high and not in the window It does seem to have two spots that appear to the untrained eye as flare, but hasselblad flair is normally pentad. Perhaps an inner reflection from something in the craft-

but to beat all, it's just across the way from where that big thing seen on
http://history.nasa.gov/ap10fj/photos/2 ... 8-3988.jpg (supposedly a piece of mylar or something) was seen in the sky beside the craft..
perhaps looking back on it. 


Quote:AS10-29-4291 :- I'm assuming it's the 'hole' in the side of the crater with the smaller holes evenly grouped around it. The dark lower 'limb' of the hole, stretching towards the crater shadow, is just a shadow of a groove , and the crater could be lined with such grooves all the way round from what little can be guessed at given the glare-out.
The same could be said of the surrounding holes, they aren't holes at all and neither are any of the other jet black spots of very similar size all over the image. Harsh film development or an overburned print,maybe? In fact there are that many black spots where you wouldn't expect shadows that dark it could just be some accident with the film developer.

Quote:Nope, here's the print
http://history.nasa.gov/ap10fj/photos/2 ... 9-4291.jpg
The sun is coming from the upper center of the photos left, the black things are boulder shadows, and the light iss shining right into the ringed hole in the crater side.
This is one of the most artificial appearing Items I've ever seen on the moon.
Portal with ramp anyone?

of course, the above is the AS10 FJ version, (another they borrowed from me.)
too bad they didn't ask- my full res versions are just --better
this was a 'target of Opportunity, and is dead center of the photograph.

[Image: AS10-29-4291-close.jpg][/quote]
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#23
Keith,
What, in your opinion, do you see here that what elevates the object in this image to the likes of those you presented in Apollo digs 2?
I am looking, but do not readily recognize a shape that I can relate to as I did 'The Cylinder', 'Groomed Slab', or the 'Twin
Stubbed columns' in the Apollo digs 2 image.
Obviously you see something very suggestive there, and I am just trying to catch up.
A ramp? The very long, black area at the dome's base? Or the shorter, straight black area leading to the ringed area surrounded by holes?
Or do you see the whole domed thing as the anomaly?
I am wondering about that very long straight 'Shadow' at the dome's base. It's upper edge is soooo straight!
So, the words Autumn and Fall are not to be capitalized?
They are in my world!

What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; and there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there a thing of which it is said, "See, this is new?"It has been already, in the ages before us. Ecc 1: 9-10
Reply
#24
What you're looking at is what appears to be a giant hole in the side of an otherwise smooth sided crater, framed by a circle with relatively equidistant holes in it. the suns angle and the photos obliquity really bring it out.

look at the big image after seeing its native sized crop
[Image: AS10-29-4291-nat.jpg]


This was - like many Apollo Orbital photos - a 'target of opportunity' photo
which basically meant take a picture of whatever caught their attention.

This is in the center of one of those.
Think about this.
When you take a photo of a scene, do you not at least attempt to center what you're trying to capture?


This is no proof or claim of anything, but it IS a candidate for further research and exploration

There are 'anomalies' you can see and toss at once, not this one, at least until we get more and better views.
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#25
Seek and ye shall (almost) find

here's a far higher res of Censorinus, which is a crater (actually a crater area as there are many Censorinus' within)
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/lunar ... 063_h2.jpg

I'm looking... so have others.
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#26
from the AS15 FJ
Quote:[The next photography takes place over the southern shore of Mare Tranquillitatis. There are four shots of Censorinus and one of the 24-km crater, Maskelyne. Of the four Censorinus shots, AS15-81-10996 is probably the best, looking south. Unusually, it is the smaller of the two craters in this shot, only 3.8 km in diameter, that carries the name Censorinus by virtue of its brightness and visibility from Earth at high illumination angles. The brightness reflects its relative youth. The 7-km Censorinus A beside it probably once looked much like its companion, but over a large fraction of an aeon (an aeon being one billion years) or more, the lunar environment has darkened its ray system to invisibility.]

[Censorinus was often considered as a possible site for the more limited Apollo H-class missions once Apollo 12 had proved that pinpoint landings were possible. Had Apollo 13 not aborted and budget cuts not converted Apollo 15 to a J-class mission, Censorinus might today have a spent LM descent stage sitting nearby, very likely the same one that now hangs in the Apollo/Saturn building at Kennedy Space Center, Florida. Instead, Apollo 14 visited Fra Mauro to the east and subsequent missions moved on to the multi-objective J-class missions, of which Apollo 15 is now the first.]

[Censorinus was interesting to Apollo planners because it is a fresh crater from a meteorite which had driven into an ancient terra landscape. It is a happy fact of crater formation that the distance of ejecta from a crater is related to the depth from which it was hauled by the impact, with the deepest material being deposited on the rim. If you radially sample an ejecta blanket going towards a crater, you are lifting rocks brought from successively deeper layers below.

So, besides the LO image I linked above in which the shadow covers most all, and the Apollo 10 oblique photo AS10-29-4291 there are four other Apollo orbital photos of it I know of as well,
these are-

AS15-81-10996
AS10-28-4038
AS10-28-4039
AS10-28-4040
I can not at present find any of these four in any sort of decent viewable copy

I noted this as well from Dr. El Baz in the Apollo 10 Photo Debriefing

Quote:The crater Censorinus: Speaking of this candidate
landing site for a later Apollo mission, the astronauts
stated: "It looks p r e t t y rough." They noted
large blocks outside and inside the crater, i.e. ,
on the ejecta rim as well as on the inside wall
slopes. Therefore, they believe that in order to
land an Apollo mission in that area we need either
high resolution photographic coverage prior to  the
flight or a "lot of hover time " .
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#27
Quote:(snip)So, besides the LO image I linked above in which the shadow covers most all, and the Apollo 10 oblique photo AS10-29-4291 there are four other Apollo orbital photos of it I know of as well,
these are-

AS15-81-10996
AS10-28-4038
AS10-28-4039
AS10-28-4040
I can not at present find any of these four in any sort of decent viewable copy

I noted this as well from Dr. El Baz in the Apollo 10 Photo Debriefing(snip)

So, as I have long held still "gut-check" and of policy of NOT "trust-but-verify" Dunno

Maybe there are NEW ones? Applause

But as for investigating and releasing data of those "interesting" areas even from the LROC seems ... well wanting ... imho anyhoo

And an aside for investigating an area that the USGS STILL maintains it's origins REMAIN "enigmatic" THEIR TERM not ours.

So........ WHAT is the definition of Hypocrisy ???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy

Uhoh

Back on :

http://www.commonsensecentral.net/BobsW ... pector.htm

And I bumbed my Nazca LUNAR NP Character Thread ... I had thought Zip would have been ALL OVER that one :uni:
"The Morning Light, No sensation to compare to this, suspended animation, state of bliss, I keep my eyes on the circling sky, tongue tied and twisted just and Earth Bound Martian I" Learning to Fly Pink Floyd [Video: https://vimeo.com/144891474]
Reply
#28
Keith,
Wow, I gotta laugh!
I have had the image inversion thing happen before, but never quite as bad as on this one.
What I thought was a dome, is actually a crater? Just as I read you say "Crater", there it was just like magic. <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/cow.gif" alt="Cow" title="cow" /> The original discription of "Crater side" didn't click.
Still laughing at myself over that! Even after the years I've followed you guys breaking down these images, I still mistake the easiest things.
BTW, thanks for the breakdown on this object.
So, the words Autumn and Fall are not to be capitalized?
They are in my world!

What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; and there is nothing new under the sun.
Is there a thing of which it is said, "See, this is new?"It has been already, in the ages before us. Ecc 1: 9-10
Reply
#29
crater viewing's tricky.

<img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/rofl.gif" alt="Rofl" title="rofl" />

I'm not seeing any LROC high res images of it, but there are several of directly nearby, and one of the crater immediately adjacent to it
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#30
Keith wrote:
Quote:when looking at something identifiably defined, viewing it in negative format might show a detail unseen in posi- however I wouldn't start a hunt by flipping an image into a neg and then wondering why it looks odd.
I dont want to belabour this, But that's the question. One of these (the current, and the 1970's vintage) Nansen images is a positive and the other a negative, as they match perfectly when one is converted, but not at all in the state as presented. The detail, though significantly enhanced in the modern version, was irrelevant to me. What was relevant, was that the current lroc image appeared virtually flat with elevations reversed and, as one of the posts declared, "No sign of an entrance".

It is clear (IMHO) that the original 70's version matches the broader topography, light, and shade surrounding photos of the massif itself, at both a ground and orbital level, and is therefore how the thing looks to the eye. Reversing the lroc made it match perfectly.

I wasnt looking for detail. Rather than 'possible', or 'likely' PS smudge tool artefacts on lunar images, I was looking for 100% evidence of obfuscation, or indeed fraud, and I think I found it. Lets review the Apollo mission:

[li] They took huge risks in both the descent and the traverse getting there.
[li] What we see, and what they describe, are two very different things.
[li]They took photographs of everything except Nansen itself (Yeah, right).
[li]They bombed it (Chapel bell) to look for hidden cavities.

In summary, they know what it is, they know what it means, they know that this knowledge is the key to everything we are, a possible paradigm changer, and so they present us with an entire series of lroc images, all negative, which serve only to completely hide and contradict what they have shown us so far. (They missed this? Gimme a break!)

If such things were possible, I'm sure they would have been back, It would've been too important not to, but 'orange soil' was most certainly not the highlight (nor purpose) of this mission.

If NASA routinely obfuscates evidence, then removing one keystone can cause the edifice to begin to crumble. One proven case provides evidence for two more, then four, and so on and so forth.

"Small steps, Sparks".
“Treason doth never prosper: what's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason.” <br />Sir John Harrington
Reply
#31
agreed™
On a satellite I ride. Nothing down below can hide.
Reply
#32
NASA = No Aloud Shouts Allowed Rofl

Bob... <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/reefer.gif" alt=":uni:" title="reefer" />
"The Morning Light, No sensation to compare to this, suspended animation, state of bliss, I keep my eyes on the circling sky, tongue tied and twisted just and Earth Bound Martian I" Learning to Fly Pink Floyd [Video: https://vimeo.com/144891474]
Reply
#33
Hi all, very interesting.. Heres my results..

[Image: AS10-29-4291-nat.jpg]

Enhanced!

[Image: crateranom2.jpg]

You can just see faint structures beginning to reveal themselves the resolutions just beyond enhancement.  Cant explain the structures.

[Image: crateranom3.jpg]

Ive tried to dig into the shadow with a little success but all in all, Ive got a bit more definition to the craters structure.
The inner walls do have some very odd structures but are almost just beyond getting to. 

Cheers

.....“from one thing, know ten thousand things”
Miyamoto Musashi,

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)