Done but not.

[Elvis Hendrix]

Armap you are very good.
But I will not accept lint. I just won't.
Get some lint and squash it between two lenses and let it make the shape of a crawling thing with a tail and legs and a head.
Or throw some lint at a subject then photograph it.
It's going to be a million to one chance that it looks like a crawling entity with thorax ,  legs  ,  head  , tail  ..
Your good.
But not that good. With Huge respect and brevity.
I think that thing was alive.
Elvis.

[ArMaP]

Armap you are very good.

Thanks, I guess.

But I will not accept lint. I just won't.

Why?

Get some lint and squash it between two lenses and let it make the shape of a crawling thing with a tail and legs and a head.

Between two lenses? Why between two lenses? Scanners don't use lenses.
And why are you talking about "a crawling thing with a tail and legs and a head"? That looks nothing like any "crawling thing" I have ever seen.

Or throw some lint at a subject then photograph it.

I didn't say that this was photographed, did I? Why should I take a photo of anything?

It's going to be a million to one chance that it looks like a crawling entity with thorax ,  legs  ,  head  , tail  ..

OK, show me where do you see a thorax, legs, head and tail. And please use the best image, not the worst, like some people do.

[Elvis Hendrix]

I'm never going to  win against you Armap. And the reality is I don't want to win against anybody.
We only have these photos, these faint glimmers of what the space craft observered to give us indications of what's up there.
I myself think there is more to luna than we are led to believe.
And I like the rest of the curious.. Can't win.
Just like we never could on ATS.

[WarToad]

I think the point is though Elvis, if you want truth, you need to really scrutinize and be honest with yourself.  An anomaly is always interesting and energizing, but you need to be willing to critically examine it and be willing to back down and say "oh, OK, not what I thought it was."  Planting a flag and wanting something to be what you want it to be doesn't advance finding real truth.

A lot of these moon/mars photos bring out the inner "Pareidolia" in all of us.  The eye sees colors/shapes and the brain always tries to see "things".  A cloud looks like a rabbit, a face on the moon, a rock looks like a lizard, ect.  The mind plays games with itself.

[ArMaP]

I'm never going to  win against you Armap. And the reality is I don't want to win against anybody.

It's not a win/lose thing, the only possible loss is if we let an opportunity of getting closer to the truth go by without looking into it, even if it goes against what we think.

Too bad you're not interested.

[Norval]

Some times the S.E.T.I. rules help.

The "signal", even if a photo, has to repeat it's self to be acceptable.

Any time one "tampers" with, or alters a photo in any way, it becomes more questionable.

Keep searching. There are plenty of NASA photos that they try to explain away that truly show some extraordinary things to get excited about. 

[deuem]

This subject bugs me...

IMHO: Make up your own.

No lint here..A bug for sure. It has 6 legs and they are articulated with joints. The tail or maybe web strand shows some joints or high spots also.

It seems that there are many NASA photos that come from a deep dark secrete place that is full of bugs. You would think they would take better care of them. I have found all sorts of bugs, larva, dust and hairs all over their prints. So the question comes up if they do this for fun to hide real things or are they just the worst photo lab in the world.

This is not lint. It is either a Moon Spider or a baby spider caught in the photo process on the negative. It shows up very well and very clean. It is sitting above the surface and I can't pick up any surface interaction like the way I would like to. Seems it is frozen in its tracks also. ie, no movement in the photo.

So it has a chance of it walking on the moon. Deuems money is on the dirty NASA lab and a baby spider caught inbetween the scanner and the negative. Maybe 30% moon 70% Spider.

100% not lint..............

For your viewing pleasure.








deuem

[zorgon]

I'm never going to  win against you Armap. And the reality is I don't want to win against anybody.

And I like the rest of the curious.. Can't win.
Just like we never could on ATS.

Oh but we can and have We already have FOUR images that ArMap admits are stumpers, he has issues with the Hills of Apollo (that we haven't addressed yet), he is close to saying "Critters" on the STS  80 footage in the storm AND we agree that the skys on Mars are BLUE after many years of 'debate'

So cheer up THAT is a HUGE WIN

We only have these photos, these faint glimmers of what the space craft observered to give us indications of what's up there.

You have to admit though  that when people say NASA lies, covers up, airbrushes and hides images, that using NASA images to prove anything is a stretch?



It like those that say the Moon Landing was a total hoax... but then use Apollo images to find anomalies

Still fun though  and they DO miss things... and we have caught them several times deleting stuff just after we posted it, like the oranges on ISS, the Apollo tiffs and one that really bugs me....  the blue glow around astronauts and equipment that on the Apollo Journal they said they had no ide what caused it but a few years later that text was edited.  I didn't get a screen capture but I think I can pull it up on wayback machine

This one

I myself think there is more to luna than we are led to believe.

So do I I have been told to expect an interesting revelation from Russia by October 2014   We shall see if that pans out

Back and forth debate keeps it alive but ultimately the goal is to build a collection of the best anamalies and try to get as much data as possible

We must be on the right track or we wouldn't have so many NASA people watching us

[zorgon]

A lot of these moon/mars photos bring out the inner "Pareidolia" in all of us.  The eye sees colors/shapes and the brain always tries to see "things".  A cloud looks like a rabbit, a face on the moon, a rock looks like a lizard, ect.  The mind plays games with itself.

While it is true that there is a "Pareidolia" factor. it is also true that when many people see the SAME THING without prompting, that means it is MOST LIKELY physically there

Take this rock face for example...



Was it carved by man? by Nature? or by Spirits?  Our ancestors would say spirits... WHY do we find a single rock Gaurdian at the entrance to most valleys?

The skeptic will say coincidence and Pareidolia but what if there is more to it?  I have searched for these "Nature Spirits" for years, and found many... uncanny faces that appear one in each major storm if you take the time to look

Look at this Noctilucent cloud... it is staring right back at you 



and this one taken by Sky Otter



or this one in Russia   






People will believe what they will, but those that see "only blurry rocks" (and there were many on ATS ) may be suffering from "Prosopagnosia"  and have lost or never had the ability to see what is right in front of there nose

The Military is always hiring people that have the ability to spot small anomalies on aerial photos. They plan bombing missions based on those spotters.

To say "I don't see it so it can't exist" is foolish. A famous quote once sadi, "'There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy'"

Very true   A couple years ago my super skeptic wife came out when we were photographing a dragon. She looked up... stopped in her tracks and said "Hey I see a dragon!"

I know several people who can summon them to appear.  You should try it but you need to be serious.

This one was summoned by Diverdown from another forum the very night we talked about it



I am fond of the Red Dragons

closeup




This one made main stream history and won first prize



So don't stop looking  

I should do a refresher on Copernicus Crater... Never finished that and it needs a new look

[zorgon]

Some times the S.E.T.I. rules help.
The "signal", even if a photo, has to repeat it's self to be acceptable.

I agree to a point

Take the Copernicus Crater images

Here is an 'object' that is clearly visible in the scan that John had, but that same area is cropped off on most NASA versions (not all )



Color enhanced




Now on that SETI rule... here is the object we labelled "Crane" Do not worry right now where they are LOL I will get back to that  the point is that the first clip is from Lunar Orbiter image LO-2-162-H2 and the second is from the same area on Lunar Orbiter LO-5-155

The first is coming at it from about a 43 degree angle and the second from straight overhead





It took MONTHS to grasp the scale and match the two images for point locations, but it was that task that got me to meet John and start Pegasus

A Crane?  Yes a huge mining crane  like this one



at the Copernicus mine



Unenhaced versions  straight clips from the high res originals




A couple other cranes

[ArMaP]

No lint here..A bug for sure. It has 6 legs and they are articulated with joints. The tail or maybe web strand shows some joints or high spots also.

A very strange bug.

This is not lint. It is either a Moon Spider or a baby spider caught in the photo process on the negative.

Spiders have 8 legs, not 6, make up your mind. 

[ArMaP]

Now on that SETI rule... here is the object we labelled "Crane" Do not worry right now where they are LOL I will get back to that  the point is that the first clip is from Lunar Orbiter image LO-2-162-H2 and the second is from the same area on Lunar Orbiter LO-5-155

The first is coming at it from about a 43 degree angle and the second from straight overhead

The famous flat, shadow-less cranes. 
I think there's another photo that shows it from a different angle.

[deuem]

Lets see, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Legs on these guys. 

Maybe 2 fell off on the way to the moon. 



Yes most spiders have 8 legs but some have 6. They are in the moon spider family. 

Deuem now counting spider legs to fall asleep. Hey, sheep only have 4 and are boring.

[ArMaP]

Yes most spiders have 8 legs but some have 6.

No, all spiders have 8 legs, that's one of the characteristics of the arachnids class. The only member of that class that doesn't have 8 legs are some species of mites.

To make it clear, in many spiders, the two front legs are used for feeding, working as an extra pair of pedipalps.

[deuem]

No, all spiders have 8 legs, that's one of the characteristics of the arachnids class. The only member of that class that doesn't have 8 legs are some species of mites.

To make it clear, in many spiders, the two front legs are used for feeding, working as an extra pair of pedipalps.

If you want to consider the two front legs that are used for feeding, working as an extra pair of pedipalps then consider 10 leg spiders.
Go look up 6 and 10 leg spiders.
Deuem