Tiny anomalies/artifacts found on the ground in Apollo photos

[Seethruart]

Some of the strangest little things you'll ever see are being found on the ground in Apollo photos. None of it is dust, rocks or even boot prints. I have only enlarged the images, the only enhancements I do are to the brightness and contrast unless otherwise stated. The main images are linked to the high res originals at the Apollo Lunar Surface Journal. Once you see the anomalies/artifacts in the enlargements, you can also see them in the original photos with no help from an enlargement. All I did was make them easier to see.

http://www.picturetrail.com/gallery/...ame=seethruart

Only a fraction of the images I need to post are posted at the site, and what is already there is a lot to absorb in one sitting. Most of the images require study because all Apollo photos are blurred and when you enlarge the photo, the blur stays with it, but with a little study you can see right through the blur well enough to know that, what you are looking at is not dust and rocks. So please bookmark the site and keep checking back. I will be updating it regulary with new anomalies found by enlarging the ground in Apollo photos.

I hope it will make some of you question NASA instead of attacking the messenger (me).

Thank you

Seethruart

[Duck Duck Goose]

Well, if you're serious, I have to say that I don't have the faintest idea what I'm supposed to be looking at. I've got the "Tower on a Mound" picture open in another window, and I don't get it. It just looks like an extreme closeup to me. I see the little box, and I see the closeup of the moon's surface, but I don't see a "tower on a mound". You mean the little cylindrical thingie there, in the lower left-hand corner? I don't personally know what that little thingie is, but I bet that in about 15 minutes someone will come along who does.

So what's your point? That the moon landings were a hoax because you can blow up pix of the moon's surface and see weird things in them? Sorry, doesn't work for me. I can blow up a picture of a dust mite and see weird things, but it doesn't make me believe that Pasteur's germ theory is all a big leg-pull on the part of the Feds.

[Chas.E]

Yes, you are correct, none of it is dust, rocks, or boot prints. What it is: silver halide crystals set in an emulsion on an acrylic substrate, processed in a chemical bath, dried, then copied onto a duplicate negative, printed on photo paper, rephotographed and passed around through unknown hands an unknown number of times, projected onto a printing plate, printed in a magazine (or wherever you found them) with a moire pattern, scanned at 72DPI, enlarged so much you can see the pixels, and then "enhanced" in the most amateurish fashion I've ever seen. Note: "airbrushing" is NOT "enhancement," it is alteration and blatant forgery.

Allow me to point out a few things to you:

1. Every "anomaly" in Apollo photographs mysteriously disappears when the original negatives are examined.
2. If you throw down a pile of gravel and dirt and then photograph it and show it to people, they will see patterns. It is a natural part of human mental activity. You see a pyramid, I see a little ducky and a fluffy bunny.
3. The SDMB has debunked idiotic Apollo photograph "analyses" like yours on many occasions. Excuse us if we are more than tired of these stupidities and decline to debunk your site slide by slide. We are here to reduce ignorance, not promote it as you are doing. But some people are incorrigible, so it is futile to argue with them, they are irredeemably stupid.

BTW, welcome to the SDMB. Now go away. Come back only if NASA lets you examine the originals.

[Duck Duck Goose]

Thank you, Chas.

[Chas.E]

In retrospect, I apologize to the SDMB users and mods for going a bit over the top, and flaming in GQ. I am sure that people will understand my frustration at seeing someone come in and bomb the SDMB with blatant ignorance with their very first post, particularly this subject which I have debunked at length, from my particular expertise (in photography, that is). This does not excuse my flaming (mild as it was), so I apologize.

[tracer]

Duck Duck Goose wrote, re. "The Tower on the Mound":

So what's your point? That the moon landings were a hoax because you can blow up pix of the moon's surface and see weird things in them?

No no no no -- that the moon landings discovered secret miniature alien spaceships on the moon, and that NASA is covering up these discoveries!

After all, that little inch-high cylindrical thing sitting on the moon dust couldn't possibly have been, say, a piece of the astronaut's equipment that he'd set aside and discarded!

[Chas.E]

Originally posted by tracer
After all, that little inch-high cylindrical thing sitting on the moon dust couldn't possibly have been, say, a piece of the astronaut's equipment that he'd set aside and discarded!

And no, it couldn't possibly be a speck of dust on the negative. Go look at his originals like:
http://www.hq.nasa.gov/alsj/a16/as16-109-17804.jpg
In particular, look at the black specks in the upper left corner, and the white specks in the sky (no, they're not stars). This means the image was photographically duplicated from the original negatives at least twice, once from a dusty negative (an "interneg") and once from a dusty positive print. These prints are worthless for analysis, unless you're a kook.

In retro-retrospect, maybe I should have flamed this idiot a little harder, but I'm trying to be polite lately.

[tracer]

Well, it is casting a shadow, pointed in the same direction as all the other shadows, so I'm willing to believe there was really something there.

Whether that something was actually cylindrical or not is another matter.

[jack@ss]

The stagehand almost set his beer can on the little aliens' spaceship! Good thing he missed it or the Men in Black would have something else to hide at area 51.

[that_darn_cat]

Pay no attention to Chas E. He obviously forgot to put on his tinfoil hat this morning and is clearly under the effect of the orbital mind control lasers.

[Sam Stone]

I find this amazing!

What amazes me about this is that one person has that much free time. What a country!

[manhattan]

Originally posted by jack@ss
The stagehand almost set his beer can on the little aliens' spaceship! Good thing he missed it or the Men in Black would have something else to hide at area 51.

There's beer on the moon? Now I understand why we went to such trouble.

When are we going back? Can they bring me a six of Tranquility IPA?

[ultrafilter]

Originally posted by Chas.E
In retro-retrospect, maybe I should have flamed this idiot a little harder, but I'm trying to be polite lately.

To each thing there is a season: a time to flame; a time to hold your tongue. I shall defend all who err on the side of politeness, yet methinks this may have been the time to flame, and flame hot.

To the OP: what, exactly, are you trying to prove? Your site seems to simultaneously claim that the moon landing is a hoax, and that aliens are visiting us.

[Freedom]

C'mon Chas.....

Don't chase this guy away too quickly, he looks like he has even greater potential than the treasure hunter who wandered into GQ several months ago.

[Sir Rhosis]

I think it's a parody of the moon hoax fools. Has to be, nobody clutches at straws and flaws these small. Reads like a parody, walks like a parody, quacks like a parody.

I hope it's a parody.

I have a photo taken of me when I was a guest on a radio show, and Jesus Christ himself is on a wall in the background. Looks just like him, beard, hair and all. Damnedest thing you ever saw. Of course it's an optical illusion of shadows in the carpeting on the wall, but it's freaky.

It's a parody... I think.

Sir Rhosis

[1kBR Kid]

It is not a parody.

He annoys the heck out of people at a serious astronmy board. He uses a different pseudonym, with no e-mail address.

Go to his guestbook and find out my real name )

[1kBR Kid]

&^$^&%#!!!!
that was supposed to be a plain smile!

[Sir Rhosis]

Oh well, fool me once, shame on me, then I'll come kill you and hide the body before you get a second chance.

Thanks for the heads up, 1kBR Kid.

Sir Rhosis

[Sir Rhosis]

1k BR Kid--your real name is Starjim?!

Sir Rhosis

[Seethruart]

Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose

So what's your point? That the moon landings were a hoax because you can blow up pix of the moon's surface and see weird things in them? Sorry, doesn't work for me. I can blow up a picture of a dust mite and see weird things, but it doesn't make me believe that Pasteur's germ theory is all a big leg-pull on the part of the Feds.

Then please blow up a picture of the ground and see if you can come up with anything close to what is on the "supposed" ground in Apollo photos. Otherwise you don't have an argument, and I suggest you study the images (not just one). You can't explain countless anomalies away, and they are countless and they aren't dust mites. They aren't rocks, dust and boot prints either.

These are serious anomalous discrepancies found on the ground and rocks in official Apollo photos. This is not a joke, nor will it ever be a joke.



Seethruart

[Seethruart]

Originally posted by Chas.E
Yes, you are correct, none of it is dust, rocks, or boot prints. What it is: silver halide crystals set in an emulsion on an acrylic substrate, processed in a chemical bath, dried, then copied onto a duplicate negative, printed on photo paper, rephotographed and passed around through unknown hands an unknown number of times, projected onto a printing plate, printed in a magazine (or wherever you found them) with a moire pattern, scanned at 72DPI, enlarged so much you can see the pixels, and then "enhanced" in the most amateurish fashion I've ever seen. Note: "airbrushing" is NOT "enhancement," it is alteration and blatant forgery.

Allow me to point out a few things to you:

1. Every "anomaly" in Apollo photographs mysteriously disappears when the original negatives are examined.
2. If you throw down a pile of gravel and dirt and then photograph it and show it to people, they will see patterns. It is a natural part of human mental activity. You see a pyramid, I see a little ducky and a fluffy bunny.
3. The SDMB has debunked idiotic Apollo photograph "analyses" like yours on many occasions. Excuse us if we are more than tired of these stupidities and decline to debunk your site slide by slide. We are here to reduce ignorance, not promote it as you are doing. But some people are incorrigible, so it is futile to argue with them, they are irredeemably stupid.

BTW, welcome to the SDMB. Now go away. Come back only if NASA lets you examine the originals.

You need to study the photos, as others are doing. None of your debunking will make these discrepancies disappear.

They are real. These anomalies don't disappear no matter what you do.


I am not about to respond to every piece of crap debunking here. You people will have to learn to accept reality in your own way. I suggest you bookmark the site, and keep abreast of the updates, and keep brushing up on your double talk and lines of BS. You can't make serious discrepancies in official Apollo photos disappear with BS. In fact, you can't make them disappear at all.

There sure are a lot of people here deathly afraid of the truth.

I'm not suprised, nor does it make any difference. You can say whatever you want about me, and I will continue posting this very strong evidence of an Apollo fake, or at the very least a big Apollo lie. There is no in between.

Your days of thwarting the truth about the Apollo missions are over. The truth is out of the bag and it's not going to get back in.



Seethruart

[Sofa King]

Okay, I'm perfectly sober right now, and I don't see anything at all. Hold on just a minute....

Okay, I have now successfully replaced the intoxication apparatus and am now perusing the photographs.... Wait! What got out of the bag? Oh, the truth. Cool. I thought you were talking about something else.

Aha! I am thoroughly convinced. Look at this photo. Hmmm. Some unknown force is preventing me from directly linking to the photograph. Suspicious. It is the one in the first collection on the left, second thumbnail from the bottom, entitled "triangular eye with pupil." It is a negative image.

In the lower lefthand corner, you can clearly see a large rock outcropping with the letters "NL" enscribed on it. I think we can infer from this that the aliens have low self-esteem, because nobody can be a die-hard fan of the National League and not get depressed by the Yankees.

Now, let's take a look at this one, entitled "round structure." Our friend Seethruart tells us,

It seems to have a door, and there is a dish/antenna sitting to the right of it. There are also other structures in-front of it. I have provided close-ups below to get a better look at this anomaly.

Yes there is. Amazing. I have seen other photographs of this curious object before, in fact. It is a highly sophisticated device designed to travel over the lunar surface. Simply amazing.

Well, I'm covinced. These photographs show conclusive evidence of intelligent life on the moon. I'm also happy to report that I have discovered a half-eaten pepperoni pizza in my refrigerator.

[ultrafilter]

Seethruart: If what you say is true, NASA has spent quite a bit of money and time on convincing the public that men did walk on the moon. Pray do tell, why would they do this?

[hansel]

Originally posted by Seethruart

There sure are a lot of people here deathly afraid of the truth.

There sure are a lot of people here deathly bored of delusional conspiracy theorists acting self-righteous.

[frock75]

Seethruart, you are quite scary. Please don't harm the little people living at the foot of your garden hose. They are not here to steal your nasal passages, no matter what that mean government mind probe suggests. Now be a nice little cum-bubble and float away.

[Sultan Kinkari]

I have been slated in the past as a "conspiracy wacko" and I don't necessarily agree but after having taking entire classes dedicated to conspiracies and media misinformation at The Evergreen State College I tend to examine conspiracy theories more closely than the average Joe. I think the link posted in the OP is a load of ca ca. I couldn't see any of the purported objects, and I even put on my glasses to make sure I wasn't missing anything.

Even though I just ate Mexican food, I just regurgited a small amount of food into my mouth...hmmm...I conclude that it must be the result of reading the OP.

[Sir Rhosis]

SeethruBS,

I note that you've taken to editing dissenting opinions from your guestbook. Also, how about a fact-based refutation of Chas E's points. Yes, I know you don't have one, but it would be fun to watch you flounder.

I told you this guy was a fucking parody... of a thinkng human being.

Sir Rhosis

[Chas.E]

Originally posted by Seethruart
You need to study the photos, as others are doing. None of your debunking will make these discrepancies disappear.

They are real. These anomalies don't disappear no matter what you do.

Funny you should say that. I collect Apollo photos, I have high resolution photographic prints from every lunar mission, I bought them straight from NASA as soon as they were released. I've also examined 35mm slides under a microscope, from an assortment of photos from the missions. I am also expert in Hasselblad cameras, I owned the same camera and lenses that were used by the astronauts. Somehow I doubt that you can say the same, all you can do is create faked photos from stuff you found on NASA's website. I guarantee you that the Apollo photos are precisely what they claim to be, photographs taken on the surface of the Moon.

I am not about to respond to every piece of crap debunking here.

Umm.. because you CAN'T? Because we've nailed your ass to a tree with brutal facts? I especially loved that bit about how your suspicious "anomaly" turned out to be the Lunar Rover.

You people will have to learn to accept reality in your own way.

Let me clue you in to reality. I saw the orbiting Apollo spacecraft with my own eyes. I went to my local university's space center (they were a major contractor for NASA) and saw them processing live data coming from the Apollo missions, and listened to the live voice feeds coming through a dish pointed into deep space, straight at the capsule. And most conclusively, I've attended seminars at my local astronomical observatory where they demonstrated beaming a laser at the Lunar Laser Reflector and how to measure the return signal. Yes, we really did go to the moon and put stuff up there.

You can say whatever you want about me, and I will continue posting this very strong evidence of an Apollo fake..

Continue?!? Let me know when you START posting real evidence instead of your faked photo crap. You're not even a very good faker, I've seen much better fakes than yours.

[Monster104]

Quoted from the site...(Third picture down)

In this inverted enlargement, the tower and it's shadow appear white. Look at the triangular object now. The point that is almost touching the tower is really the cockpit of a space craft, and complete with darkened triangular windows. The craft itself seem to have wings that didn't show up in the non inverted version. It also seems to have dome with windows all around it

Need I say more?

[Baraqiyal]

As I was squinting to see the “wingless shuttle” in the first group of photos, I was thinking how much this was like trying to find shapes in the clouds. I was amused to find that the same site does indeed have a section on mysterious shapes in the clouds.

Staring at the “Art in the Dirt” photo, I was never able to make out the “two females”, but I was able to make out mysterious shapes of my own. For example, in the upper left corner there appears to be a descending flight of stairs. It just demonstrates the minds ability to find patterns and to fill in missing information.

To Seethruart, since it is your goal to expose the “Apollo fake”, are you saying that NASA engineers carefully constructed miniature cities, wingless shuttles, and giant eyes to somehow fool us into believing that the moon landings were fake? Does that really make sense to you?

[Chas.E]

A small amount of Googling yielded links to other conspiracy nut boards, where he isn't even taken seriously by other conspiracy nuts who are desperate to believe even fakes. But since it is against SDMB rules to drag in disputes from other boards, I will not cite the web page here, if you're really interested, you can find it yourself.

BUT.. I will cite this page:

http://swampgas.50megs.com/see/

which debunks one of seethrufaker's claims. It clearly shows how easy it is to debunk his crap, even without access to original negatives. It also shows the futility of debunking his stupid fakes, because he STILL maintains it's an "anomaly." It would be just as easy to debunk every single one of his claims, and just as futile.

[TheLoadedDog]

Aah. I geddit. You have to know how to interpret the photos. Strange, that sounds familiar.......

[MEBuckner]

Seriously. Even with the enhanced, inverted, cropped, inside-out sideways on a Tuesday pictures, all I'm seeing is dirt and a bunch of rocks. The tiles on the floor of the bathroom in the house I grew up in had more meaningful patterns than this. Do I need new eyeglasses or something?

[hardcore]

You can't make serious discrepancies in official Apollo photos disappear with BS. In fact, you can't make them disappear at all.

Seethruart, why do you keep misspelling appear? There is no dis prefix, so let's clear that right up.

Seriously, though... I spent a good deal of time perusing your photos and descriptions, and I just have two questions:

• What type of whacked-out, extra-strength psychotropic substances are you taking?
• Do you have any left over? Because it's the weekend and I would like to see the little green men on the moon with you.

[nerv]

It seems to me that this thread is simply a way for Seethrough-arse to get hits on his homepage, which has advertising banners. He seems to have opened the thread as pretty much his first post on the boards.

By the way, I have just discovered a group of moles on my forearm that resembles the constellation Orion. It's not an exact match, but it's closer than TransparentFakery's "triangles" etc.

[SPOOFE]

These anomalies don't disappear no matter what you do.

Except what YOU need to explain is... why are they there? What placed the "shuttle" there? What placed the "tower on a mound" there? What, pray tell, do these anomalies indicate?

If you respond with "It indicates that the Moon landings were hoaxed", you'd better be prepared to say WHY. More to the point, you better explain why it's conceivable that these "shapes" appear in Earth-dirt, but not Moon-dirt.

Furthermore, I would say that you watch too much Star Trek (your fetish with "shuttles" are painfully obvious). Additionally, I think you should familiarize yourself with the works of Bev Doolittle.

[SpaceGhostofArrakis]

Here now, SPOOFE, let'
s not make fun of Star Trek watchers...

Seriously, it doesn't look like anything to me. I'm guessing this is another one of those cases where you "Hear hoofbeats and think Zebras".


Either that, or you have airbrushed crap on and tried to pass it off as legit, like Chas. E. said.

[Crusoe]

I think someone's been staring at this site for too long.

[Milossarian]

Don't be so quick to dismiss this ...

I seem to recall O.J. Simpson running from the government after one of these "missions."

With James Brolin. In a white Ford Bronco. I think.

[Sofa King]

Despite the... levity of my earlier post, I did point out that the guy also mistook the rover's main dish as a part of the "round structure" mentioned above.

Seethruart, you are walking the fine line between fun and the unacceptable. I appreciate the work you have done and your efforts to provoke people's thoughts, but your work has some serious flaws.

First of all, you have to have a premise, here. What in the Sam Hill is it? Are you claiming the photos are faked and that bored forgers have inserted hidden clues to tip off the ultra-observant? Are you claiming that aliens were quietly observing the landings? Are you claiming that the moon is a mysterious, surreal place that sprouts eyes and Picasso paintings simply for its own amusement? Clarify your thoughts, please.

Second, in less than ten minutes of less-than cogent analysis, I pointed out a glaring error in your observation. What do you have to say to that, and why should I waste one more minute with you and your site?

Third, you are doing the classic lithium-free dance of denial in the face of expertise when you fail to address Chas.E's opinion--an opinion most of us are more willing to accept than yours.

Get your shit straight, or get the hell out of here. We enjoy our wackos and lunatics, otherwise I wouldn't still be here. We'll welcome your contribution if you can stay within the realm of logic and politeness. If not, the countdown has already begun, buddy. I've seen it a dozen times before, and you're no different.

[Seethruart]

Originally posted by Sir Rhosis
SeethruBS,

I note that you've taken to editing dissenting opinions from your guestbook. Also, how about a fact-based refutation of Chas E's points. Yes, I know you don't have one, but it would be fun to watch you flounder.

I told you this guy was a fucking parody... of a thinkng human being.

Sir Rhosis

None of you posted any opinions in my guest book. I don't believe any of you are capable of anything but denial, insults and character assassination, and I don't tolerate that from people with such small and closed minds.

As I thought, not one of you questioned NASA about this, you only attacked the messenger. Not many of you even looked at the images. You simply denied it without even taking a peak. Because you are afraid of the truth.

My sole purpose for posting a link here was to show that very thing. I have already successfully shown that to many honest people across the net, because honest people have no reason to deny everything at my site, because they personally have nothing to hide, and they have nothing to fear from the Apollo missions being proven as faked.

The same can not be said of the participants on this message board.



Seethruart

[Sofa King]

You know what? When the messenger runs before me and says,

"Elvis Philadelphia Experiment Blue Book Jimmy Hoffa Marilyn Monroe Cattle Mutilation!!!!"

I say, "try not to hit the sidewalk on your way out the door, chump."

Take your "message" to the nutjobs who will listen. We gave you one chance, which is one more than you deserve.

[Atreyu]

Originally posted by Seethruart
Not many of you even looked at the images. You simply denied it without even taking a peak. Because you are afraid of the truth.

Seethruart, the anti-BS factor here is pretty strong. When someone comes here with extraordinary claims, the expectation is that they can back it up with extraordinary evidence. I've looked at the pictures. I'm agreement with the others in this thread. Your evidence has been found woefully wanting.

People who act like idiots on this message board are going to get called "idiots." People who bring reasoned agruments about topics are (usually) going to find reasoned replies.

Ever since Fox TV aired their contemptible "Moon Landing Hoax" special, I sort of expected folks like this to come out of the woodwork. However, the claims of the hoaxers have been thoroughly debunked. I'd start here for a good debunking.

No one here has an agenda or ulterior motive in "protecting" NASA. The goal of this message is the fighting of ignorance. The "moon landing hoax" claims have been definitively shown to be ignorant in their foundations, so forgive us if we are skeptical of persons making claims from that position.

Now, be a good chap and shove off. There's a good fellow.

Come back when you have retired your tinfoil hat.

For penance, repeat to yourself three times before bedtime every night, "Art Bell's show is entertainment, not informational."

[frock75]

Originally posted by Crusoe
I think someone's been staring at this site for too long.

Now that was funny!

[jack@ss]

For penance, repeat to yourself three times before bedtime every night, "Art Bell's show is entertainment, not informational."

and I was just going to point the kid to http://atrbell.com.
Seriously, I think he'd make almost as good a guest as Zeccheria Sitchin.

[Mangetout]

well, I looked at the pictures...

... am I missing something? - it looks just like a bunch of rocks and dust to me.

[Mangetout]

Originally posted by Crusoe
I think someone's been staring at this site for too long.

ROFPMSL!

[super_head]

Originally posted by Atreyu
No one here has an agenda or ulterior motive in "protecting" NASA.

OK, is he gone? Do you think he bought it?

Heh heh, if he only knew how SDMB is really a front for the NASA-instigated alien invasion of planet Earth! Muwahahaha!

[edwino]

I keep looking at those pictures, and all I can see is circumcised penises.

:d&r:

[RickJay]

Originally posted by MEBuckner
Seriously. Even with the enhanced, inverted, cropped, inside-out sideways on a Tuesday pictures, all I'm seeing is dirt and a bunch of rocks. The tiles on the floor of the bathroom in the house I grew up in had more meaningful patterns than this. Do I need new eyeglasses or something?

If you do, I'll take the appointment right after yours. I see absolutely nothing in ANY of these photos except a lot of rocks and dust.