[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seethruart *
**
…and photographic evidence is a FAR CRY from “this blurry rock almost looks like a space ship if you squint your eyes and show a negative image, and ignore the boot prints, and use your imagination A LOT”
I don’t hang out.
I’m sure not all of you are NASA worshippers. Like the previous uninformed poster who thought Apollo 13 landed on the moon, some people are just easily led.
I guess that must describe you, since you deny being a NASA worshipper.
Seethruart
Seethruart wrote:
So, have you found anomalies in any photos taken of the lunar surface, other than those of the Apollo landing missions?
If these anomalies are present in the Apollo lunar landing photos, but not present in known long-range photos – like those of Apollo 8, Apollo 10, Clementine, or photos of the lunar surface taken by Earth-orbiting cameras – then it raises a huge question as to whether the Apollo landing photos really were taken from long range, as you allege, and whether these anomalies really exist on the moon at all.
Seethruart wrote:
<nitpick>
It doesn’t seem that Juliana thought that Apollo 13 actually landed on the moon. She was just expressing the fact that her face-to-face meeting with an Apollo 13 astronaut convinced her that the Apollo program was real, and that the Apollo 13 astronauts really did fly through space toward the moon, and so it was therefore eminently believable to her that other Apollo missions really did go all the way there and land on the surface.
Her comment about trusting “a man who has actually been there” probably referred to an Apollo 13 astronaut who had “been to” the moon, in the sense that he passed within 60 nautical miles of the lunar surface. (The Apollo 8 and Apollo 10 astronauts, and all the command module pilots who’ve had to stay parked in lunar orbit, also like to say they “went to the moon.” And they’re right.)
Actually people have found anomalies in the Apollo orbital photos. I don’t have a link to their sites, nor do I know if they have sites. I have seen their work on messages boards and that’s about it (so far). I would link to it, but I don’t think an invasion of belligerant debunkers is something they would appreciate. Those people believe we went to the moon, and the orbital shots show “lunar cities.” I have a link to this Apollo 10 photo but that’s it (for now). Unfortuantely, it’s only got boxes and circles drawn on it and no descriptions. This person needs a site where he can describe what he’s pointing out. As it stands, unless you “really” study this photo, you won’t see much at all.
http://albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=166068&a=13442297&p=51327810 (Before you cut this person’s work down, remember he still wants to believe we went to the moon)
It seems people are only now starting to take a close look at the orbital photos, so there is no telling what may be discovered as time goes on.
I have found anomalies in Clementine photos (before I ever discovered the anomalies in Apollo photos). I didn’t start studying Clementine photos until someone else found anomalies in them first, and I saw their photos. In a previous post, I left links to sites with Clementine anomalies in them. You can’t even admit to obvious and blatant things I’ve shown so far, and I won’t waste my time showing you other things that you will only deny, and pretend don’t exist. You need to find someone else to play that little game with you. I’m not the one.
Don’t worry, even if you never see anything, someone else will tell you about it.
Seethruart
LOL!!! You people have an excuse for everything!
The people in this forum become more laughable as the days go by.
Seethruart
Lord knows you set the bar pretty high.
Damn it, I promised I’d stop. I feel so dirty.
And now a Kodak moment:
Astronauts Take Kodak Stereoscopic Camera on Apollo 11 Mission
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/government/ias/heritage/apollo11.shtml
Kodak, Another company declared a liar by Seethruart.
He’s absolutely right. We have nothing to counter his brilliancy and logic, and the facts he presents are unrefutable. It would serve us right if he abandoned us to our ignorance. If he left right now and never came back, it would be just what we deserved.[edited out two more paragraphs of grovelling-Czarcasm]
The thing is, you can’t ignore the boot prints, because the boot prints are not really boot prints. Not in ANY of the photos I have posted at the site. Take a real close look at those supposed prints.
None of this is easy to see (but it only takes a matter or time and study), or it would have defeated the purpose of doing it. The fact is, once you see it, you will see it clearer and in more detail each time you look at it, and you will see more than I pointed out. Also, once you see it, you will ALWAYS see it, and you will know it’s not rocks and dust.
It really takes no imagination at all to see these anomalies, just study.
I know you are one of the ones who would like to make it all go away, but at least you have the courage to study the photos.
That’s more than I can say for most of the people who have posted in this thread.
Seethruart
People have been accusing me of calling someone “ignorant” since I’ve been here (and I never have). With debunkers calling each other “ignorant” (he did say “our” ignorance), why would I even have to?
I wouldn’t think of abandoning you. You have no idea what you are deserving of, but before it’s all over, you will get exactly what you deserve.
Seethruart
Wait a minute.
Is this like one of those Magic-Eye[sup]TM[/sup] things? I love those! I wish you had cleared that up earlier.
I think I saw a sailboat in that first pic you linked to. Am I right?
Seethruart wrote:
If you did, I sure as heck couldn’t find it.
The only earlier post of yours I found where you mentioned Clementine at all was in this snippet from the previous page:
If you meant to imply that these Clementine images also contained anomalies, you sure as heck didn’t make your intentions obvious.
After your other posts, I hope you don’t expect me to start taking you seriously now.
As far as the magic-eye thing, it’s also called “hidden art”, “hidden picture”, or “overlapping art”, “art within art” etc. You can study the supposed ground in ANY Apollo photo, and art will pop out at you. It will be blatant, and you will look at your yard and your drive way, and dirt fields and art will NOT pop out at you. Art will only pop out at you if you are studying the ground in Apollo photos or satellite images of other planets. That’s because it’s long range art, meant to be seen from above and from a great distance.
I tend not to look for art in Apollo photos, and look more for structure (because structure is less deniable). In the beginning I couldn’t help but to see the art, because I didn’t know the art disguised other things. Now I don’t look for art (though it still pops out sometimes anyway, and I post some of it), I mainly look for structural anomalies that don’t happen in nature. The newest artwork of an alien and a man is an exception, because it is a unique find. I doubt anyone else on earth has a photo of a man and an alien together, depicted in art on the ground and rocks in an Apollo photo (not until now anyway). I had a lot of fun showing that to people before I posted it. They were already freaked out by the other anomalies, and that one blew them away.
There is also another reason for the Art on Earth folder. It will lead to something even more fascinating than long range anomalies on the ground in Apollo photos. That’s when we’ll see the real debunkers come out.
One shock at a time for now though.
Seethruart
Well, I’m not on speaking terms with this swizzle stick, so would one of you ask him if he’s the guy that killed Elvis?
I have to know.
I think the swizzle stick is the one who can’t accept reality when it’s in his face, so he lashes out with childish insults to the messenger.
You probably can’t take the blame for your own mistakes, nor can you apologize when you are wrong. They didn’t break the mold when they made you. You are common.
Seethruart
Guys, Seethruart is RIGHT. I’ve examined the photos myself. You can see my thread with MY OWN PROOF here: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=85424
Truly, I was floored, but the PHOTOGRAPHIC PROOF can’t lie!!!
So you’re saying that photos that were taken all those years ago, that have been in the possesion of scientists and photographic experts, as well as countless others, have not been analized by anyone until you got a hold of them? Or that they looked at them and couldn’t find anything even though they have far better equipment and have had far longer to look (not to mention there being far more people looking at them) and suddenly you come along and find anomolies that no one else could find?
You need to go back and reexamine how you arrived at your conclusions, your logic is seriously flawed.
P. S. By the way, your “mini statue of leaning man” is really a fish.
LOL!!! I like it when you have to go to such devious lengths to try and prove “something?”
It shows you can’t honestly face this, nor can you honestly dispute it. It shows how low you are willing to stoop, in order to hide the truth.
This truth bothered you so much, you had to start another thread about it (which I will not participate in, but I will leave a link to it from other places so others can watch you make fools of yourselves).
Thanks for letting me know for certain how deeply this reality is affecting you.
It lets me know it’s not all in vain.
Seethruart
Hey, I’m a graphics geek with insomnia, I had nothing better to do. I notice you don’t address the fact that the raccoon I found looks WAY MORE like what I said it looked like than any of your “flying craft” or “shuttles” which all just look like rocks to the rest of the world.