This is much less fun with seethruart’s photo page inaccessible. All the same:
seethruart: You might want to check the date on your little orange bottles. That’s when the medication expired.
However, with Mr. Art’s contention that these long-range shots were taken from low-Earth orbit, smearing vaseline on the lens would be a difficulty. Additionally, the blurring is only one flaw with his “long-range” shot theory (as I’ve already pointed out).
In order for his theories to match up with reality, they become exponentially more complex the more you get into the specifics. That’s why he’s avoided the specifics… by glossing over with generalities, he doesn’t need to think much.
Hmmmm…
Seethrupiper’s images are down AND he’s been abnormally silent…
Maybe the miniscule moon men put heat on the MIB?
NAH, i go with the theory he renewed his prescribtion…
Riftmann…
Picturetrail performs maintenance on its servers nightly. I’m sure Mr. Art’s works of… art… will be back to grace the 'Net come sunrise.
Nightly maintenance may be the rule on Picturetrail, SPOOFE, but in this instance they’re performing hardware upgrades. Their own page says “We anticipate the upgrades will take several days to complete.”
So the authoritative evidence is…
*…GASP…
…unavailable?*
Good Lord, man, the conspiracy goes higher, deeper, broader, darker, louder, harder, pointier, stickier, and more lemony-fresh than any of us ever considered!
Evidently the photo server people are also Afraid Of The Truth[sup]TM[/sup] and have suspended service in order to prevent our valiant crusader from Getting His Message Out.[sup]TM[/sup]
[sub]The dangerous thing about being sarcastic is the risk that Mr. Selective Perception will pick up just the supportive part and run with it.[/sub]
Can’t you people see the truth? The long range photos were taken from the top of tall buildings!
I can’t wait for the Martian surface water/lymphocyte photo to get analysed, i am sure that it will yeild many more disturbing images that will help us understand why NASA has decided to defraud the world.
long live Seethruart! I wish to subscribe to your newsletter! please tell me more!!!
I notice that Sea Sorbust hasn’t returned either.
Hi everyone! I apologize for having been away. You can see the picture trail site decided to do a spur of the moment major sever upgrade. I do have faith my page will return (the last time this happened it returned one folder short (the “bootprints?” folder). I have just obtained more web space and I am taking a crash course in building a web page. I have no interest in that part of it at all, but I have to do what I have to do. I hope to have many sites before I’m done, to make sure this evidence is always easily accessible. It’s not only the truth, it’s a fascinating story, accompanied by incredible photographic evidence to back it up. It will become part of the record. To many people it is already part of the record.
In the meantime, I have found an incredible enlargment of the ground (including the areas resembling boot prints). It’s a NASA enlargement. I posted crops from another version of that pic on my site, but this rivals my enlargements, and it’s better than looking at cropped sections, because this way you get to see the entire enlarged photo at one time (like I do). It requires some study over a period of days (but it is by no means boring study). I have studied this photo (not this particular enlargement) for months and still see something else I missed each time I study the photo. After studying it, you will realize you are looking at a long range image of a strange landscape, and not actual close up ground.
http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/apollo/apollo12/html/as12-47-6921.html (This link goes to the resolution option page, and not the actual photo. It’s a 4MB download, so you may want to bookmark this page and download it when you have an opportunity).
Here are a few things to look for. Start at the very bottom left corner, and scroll along the bottom edge to your right until you come to the first area resembling a boot print (it actually resembles “part” of a bootprint), center it in your browser then, scroll directly up from that area, until you come to the very next area resembling “part” of a bootprint. In that area are two faces sticking out of the ground. They are facing up and the photo catches a side view (profile) of them. As you study the faces, they will disappear and you will see what actaully comprises the faces. Then the faces will reappear. After you are done there, scroll directly up and to the left and you will see a gray haired lady laying face up in a hole with her eyes closed (only her head is visible). Look just below the gray haired lady, on the side of the small crater is a transparent object and you can see the light reflecting on it. When you’re done there go back to the very first area resembling part of a boot print at the bottom of the page, and look at the elongated area resembling a bootprint that is next to it. It has all kinds of objects on it, the object at the very end closest to you is triangular. Once you’re done there scroll up to the next area resembling a print and it has a sphere on it. Once you study that images, you will see there are spheres (and other types of craft) all over the photo, both in the air and on the ground. Some resemble marbles or pearls. Once you are done there scroll to the left to the next area resembling a print. That area really doesn’t resemble a print, and if you study it, you will see there is some type of complex of structures on it. Some of the structures on it can be discerned realtively well. That’s just the print like areas, I’ll let you see the rest for yourself.
I know once you study this and see what I have pointed out (and found more on your own), you will wonder how anyone ever missed it. It’s called “conditioning.” People have been conditioned to believe there is nothing but dust and rocks on the ground in Apollo photos. Many have been conditioned so well, they won’t even consider the possibilty, or study the evidence. Those who get “rocks and dust” out of their minds before studying this photo will get their eyes full. They will see a long range image of an alien landscape that only few average humans have ever seen before.
Enjoy!
Seethruart
seethruart, this is no different from “seeing” “faces” in clouds and in natural rock formations like New Hampshire’s Old Man of the Mountain. (It’s also on the back of one of the New Hampshire quarter.) It doesn’t mean there’s a dead alien civilization on the Moon or that aliens are making clouds. It means human beings are pre-disposed to “see” faces in certain random patterns because it’s important to our survival to be able to recognize a human face. It’s an evolved trait.
Get help. I’m serious.
Jab, it won’t work. We’ve told Seethruart/Piper this many many MANY times on the BABB. He responded with the statement that all those things are artificial too. He even went so far as to say that the Interstellar Dust Cloud M13, the Eagle Nebula was a giant construct. http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap000924.html
You supposedly can see faces in it, but hell if I can.
We’ve told him about Apophenia http://www.skepdic.com/apophenia.html and Pareidolia http://www.skepdic.com/pareidol.html He rambled on about those words only being found in a skeptic’s dictionary. When we showed him links to those words in a medical dictionary he remained strangely, but predictably, silent. I personally think he should change his name to Pipereidolia.
He’s a waste of time and resources and I think the only reason I still read his insane ramblings is for the entertainment value.
I’ve ran across many cranks on the internet, but Seethruart has got to be the most illucid insane crank yet.
Are we also pre-disposed to seeing tiny structures and space crafts in boot prints? Are we pre-disposed to seeing bootprints and realizing they aren’t really boot prints? Go see what the New Hampshire Quarter says about that. Also, if you want to make your point believable, take some photos of the ground outside your back door, put on some boots and step around and take some photos of that too, and post them, and let’s see how many faces are popping out of the ground, and how many little spheres are on and above the ground, and how many gray haired ladies are lying around. Until then you don’t have much of an argument. Anyway, what makes you think “Old Man in the Mountain” is a natural formation?
As far as needing help goes, if you’ll notice this thread has the more views than any recent thread in this particular forum. When it comes to standing my ground and attracting attention to the truth, I have all the help I need.
Seethruart
You’ve got something yet to learn about insanity, illucidity, and downright depravity. Try searching Google advanced newsgroup search for messages written by Jabriol (who really seems to enjoy posting messages that taunt people in rape victim support groups and the like). Or fm (John Knight, Father’s Manifesto; I recommend that you do not visit that link unless you want to be revolted). Or Nando Ronteltap. Or Androcles.
Seethruart is a kook, but he’s not the farthest out by a long shot.
Tut tut tut, Seetruart even a 4 megabyte image is still a low resolution image compared to film resolution, whatever you see there (and I saw only dirt and footprints) is not to be trusted because a true film resolution photo is 20 or MORE megabytes in size. A lot of the detail is lost and nobody will accept this evidence even if you think anything was there. Once more: Those photos are not the right ones to use in a research like yours. (Your message is no good).
That is not conditioning, that is perceptual ambiguity.
And if you have something that is clearly there, the shape should remain, not disappear:
And it is more likely caused because this is a digital COPY of the original photo. (On top of that, it looks out of focus) before you complain that it is NASA who says this is a high-resolution image: it is, but only for the website NOT for research that involves close examination of features.
Seethruart,
People slow down and stare at car wrecks too. Its not just because you “stand your ground” its because people here are utterly fascinated that someone in this day and age actually, truly appears to believe this crap.
What about the Soviets? Don’t you think that if there was the slightest, tiniest microscopic doubt that this didn’t happen that they would have put all of their immense might and resources into exposing it? They certainly have/had a lot more ability to do so than you and more at stake.
Or, do you think that the Communist Soviet government of the 60s got Cozy with tricky Dick and became part of the big “conspiracy?”
When you go to the monkey house at the zoo, which monkey gets more attention: the one sitting quietly in the far corner, or the one up front smearing feces on its head?
It’s the one throwing feces at people.
This is my theory about long range images as it appears at the site. Since the site is down and I haven’t posted it here, I thought it would be a good idea.
This may answer some questions for some of you. Of course I know there are others here who will never get “dust and rocks” out of their minds. Conditioning can be a powerful thing, depending on the individual and their length of exposure, and their willingness to believe whatever they are told.
My Theory.
Even after you know my theory, you will still have to prove this to yourself by studying the photo crops. There is really nothing I can say or do to convince you. The images speak for themselves, but they require study.
If you took these tiny anomalies at face value, and believed the moon landings were real then, you would have to conclude there was an advanced “minuscule” civilization on the moon, and that the astronauts knew about it (as evidenced by the photos of, and boot prints around the tiny anomalies). I don’t believe that to be the case, and I also believe I have the evidence to prove that is not the case.
This is my theory. First of all this is going to sound stranger than science fiction, but please remember, I did not put these anomalies on the ground in Apollo photos, I simply found them and enlarged them and posted them here. I believe the ground in Apollo Moon Landing photos (from missions 11 through 17) is a series of long range images of the moon’s surface and that the astronauts were super-imposed onto those long range images. The only aspect I focus on here is, the series of long range images the astronauts were super-imposed onto. If you want to see more evidence of super-imposing (by way of glitches/oversights), you can check out these moon hoax sites.</p>
http://www.apollohoax.com/(Does not work with Netscape).
http://www.anomalog.com/bergrun6.html (This is not a moon hoax site. This person points out what he calls “growths” on the astronauts and the equipment. I believe they are the results of, and glitches from the super-imposing process. Some things at that site are as strange as the anomalies I point out here).
http://members.dencity.com/yeshua/index.htm (This is my friend Visitor’s page. He started finding tiny anomalies on the ground in Apollo photos at the same time I did).
What are long range images?
Long range images are satellite photos, or photos taken by aircraft high in the atmosphere. I believe the ground in Apollo moon photos is either a series of slightly zoomed satellite images, or photos taken by high altitude aircraft, or maybe a combination of both. They only thing I know for certain is, they are long range photos of some kind.
You may wonder how I discovered this. Earlier this year, I watched the Fox TV special about the faked moon landings. I thought it was interesting, but it was not conclusive. Plus it mainly focused on the video footage (I focus mainly on the photos). Anyway, I was reading what people had to say about it on internet message forums, and I was suprised to see how anyone who thought the Fox program raised interesting points was visciously attacked. It seems if we went to the Moon there would be so much concrete proof of it that, anyone who thought the moon landings were faked would simply be laughed at and ignored. It was this overly defensive type of reaction that made me suspicious enough to go to several moon hoax sites and study their evidence.
At the same time I decided to take a closer look at the moon hoax evidence, I was doing a study of satellite photos of other planets and the moon. One night, a week or two after I had visited the moon hoax sites, I was studying some satellite photos of Mars, and one of the Apollo hoax photos I had downloaded from a hoax site had gotten mixed in with my Mars photos. When I opened the Apollo photo by mistake, I left it open for a few minutes and looked at it, and since my eyes were already adjusted to focusing on tiny things on the ground in satellite photos, I decided just for the heck of it to study the ground in that Apollo photo to see if any tiny anomalies were there. I was amazed and stunned to have actually found something. I then started pouring through photos of the ground in Apollo photos from every mission, and the ground from each mission, looked more like the satellite photos I had been studying than, it did any actual close up ground I had ever seen before.
There are a multitude of reasons this hasn’t been discovered until now. First, from the time NASA started receiving the very first satellite images of the moon’s surface until the last Apollo Lunar mission, we have been told there is nothing on the surface of the moon except for “rocks and dust.” Secondly, the long range images were zoomed just enough to make mountains look like boulders, and boulders look like pebbles. Just in case that wasn’t enough, the ground in each and every Apollo photo seems to be slightly blurred, and to see what is really on the ground, you have to see through the blur. You must also remember, when these Apollo missions took place, no one had a personal computer (they didn’t come along until many years later), so they had to go to a photo processor to get images enlarged, but first they had to aquire an original Apollo photo to enlarge. Now the photos are easily and readily accessible on the internet, and anyone with a basic image program can enlarge any photo they download. I just happened to enlarge the ground in Apollo photos.
Actual structures on the ground are so small that at a glance, or even upon casual close study you will think they are only pebbles on the ground. However, if you pay attention to tiny details, and study the ground like it is a satellite photo, and look for stuctures on a tiny scale, you can see there are buildings and sculpture, and art, and space craft, and strange things beyond description. It is a surface very different from the earth’s surface and could be described as “alien.” There are both conventional and non-conventional structures and crafts. Many of the buildings do resemble rocks, and many structures resemble astronaut’s boot prints. Once you see the long range anomalies in the enlargements, you can see them very plainly in the original, and you will wonder how anyone missed them. They missed them because they believed there was nothing but rocks and dust on the ground in Apollo photos, so they never looked for it. Once you start to see this for yourself, you will never again see rocks and dust on the ground in Apollo photos, you will see what’s really there…images of strange cities taken from a very long distance. It’s quite amazing how that happens.
How did NASA get those long range images of the moon’s surface?
There could be a number of ways. They could be zooms from NASA satellite photos (that we’ve never seen), or they could be zooms of the surface taken by an earlier Apollo mission that orbited the moon, or we are not alone, and we had help.
I want to make one last thing clear in this message. This is not a joke.
Seethruart
The use of digital COPIES of fotos, in a research like yours, is the joke
It’s amazing how someone can carry on endlessly, and not even answer a simple question.