180km wide lake discovered on the far side of the moon

[vril-ya]

this photo of Tsiolkovsky should make you question that moon is a "dead rock", a lifeless place with no atmosphere or gravity strong enough to hold that atmosphere. liquid water could never exist on the moons surface if there was no atmosphere to stabilize the extreme temperature oscilations and gravity strong enough to hold that atmoshpere.

http://s28.postimg.org/6izak6rt9/Tsiolkovsky.jpg



also, take a good look at this apollo 8 frame showing Tsiolkovsky in the center. it is looking in W > E direction.

http://www.directlinkupload.com/uploads/93.142.160.60/AS08-12-2196A.jpg

[The Seeker]

vril_ya, what is the source for the first photo you posted?


seeker

[Sgt.Rocknroll]

Don't worry your lots are not by the lakeside. Lol

[The Seeker]

Don't worry your lots are not by the lakeside. Lol

bwahahaha Sarge don't let the cat out of the bag 

'nother week or so gonna add a couple more 

[spacemaverick]

Also curious regarding the source....okay seeker...me thinks you all have something up your sleeve? lol

[The Seeker]

Also curious regarding the source....okay seeker...me thinks you all have something up your sleeve? lol

Who,me?  not I, sayeth the old fat man with no teeth 

[vril-ya]

the source of the first photo is vladimir terzinski, more precisely his lecture (also shows AS08-12-2196 and yet another frame of tsiolkovsky)

second photo i found at holyconservancy.org which has a huge collection of apollo frames http://www.holyconservancy.org/images/PLAN/MOON/AS08/

[astr0144]

Wow  Vril !,

I have never seen a youtube video as long as this before ! 7 hrs 28 mins  ....I didnt think it was possible to upload such a huge video....Have you actually watched through all of that ?

What are your thoughts on the Speaker...Is he known as being Credible in your experience ?

the source of the first photo is vladimir terzinski, more precisely his lecture http://youtu.be/tEe-QGohonU?t=6h35m6s (also shows AS08-12-2196)

[vril-ya]

there are many videos of 10+ hours on YT, usually some nonsense like "Nyan Cat". he is definitely far out for a "average joe", but a erudite physician, electrical engineer and researcher in the area of "forbidden" science and secret societies. yes, i actually watched the whole lecture, twice.

Wow  Vril !,

I have never seen a youtube video as long as this before ! 7 hrs 28 mins  ....I didnt think it was possible to upload such a huge video....Have you actually watched through all of that ?

What are your thoughts on the Speaker...Is he known as being Credible in your experience ?

[ArMaP]

this photo of Tsiolkovsky should make you question that moon is a "dead rock", a lifeless place with no atmosphere or gravity strong enough to hold that atmosphere.

Anyone can add colour to an image.

Could you point to when that image appears on the video? Thanks in advance.

also, take a good look at this apollo 8 frame showing Tsiolkovsky in the center. it is looking in W > E direction.

http://www.directlinkupload.com/uploads/93.142.160.60/AS08-12-2196A.jpg

That image was resized and had the contrast enhanced, making the details disappear, it looks nothing like it should, like this one.

[vril-ya]

video is linked with the timing. regarding the AS08-12-2196, truth is exactly the opposite of what you said, NASA version is tilted 90° and all details have been destroyed and thick layers of gray color added.

Anyone can add colour to an image.

Could you point to when that image appears on the video? Thanks in advance.
That image was resized and had the contrast enhanced, making the details disappear, it looks nothing like it should, like this one.

[ArMaP]

video is linked with the timing.

You're right, I didn't noticed that, as I used the link to download the video (I always do that, as that's much faster than waiting for the video to load on YouTube).

regarding the AS08-12-2196, truth is exactly the opposite of what you said, NASA version is tilted 90° and all details have been destroyed and thick layers of gray color added.

I don't have time to explain what I see now, I will get back to this when I get home from work.

[Pimander]

So if we pull grey out of the image colour and detail will emerge?  Can we do that with GIMP or Photoshop?

I am rubbish at image analysis and processing so forgive me if what I typed is nonsense. 

[vril-ya]

in some photos yes, you need to use a number of tools in photoshop in correct measure and order not to kill other details while bringing other out, mostly the curves tool, but this one on NASA website is destroyed beyond repair, with details completely removed by overexposing and adding layers of artificial greyness. you can see the same procedure done in most of the published apollo frames. in example what these criminals do, look at the apollo 15 frame how NASA publishes it today



and how the original actually looks

So if we pull grey out of the image colour and detail will emerge?  Can we do that with GIMP or Photoshop?

I am rubbish at image analysis and processing so forgive me if what I typed is nonsense. 

[ArMaP]

regarding the AS08-12-2196, truth is exactly the opposite of what you said, NASA version is tilted 90° and all details have been destroyed and thick layers of gray color added.

Now I have the time.

First of all, how do you know which of those photos shows the orientation of the camera when the photo was taken?

Now, about the details being destroyed by hypothetical layers with grey colour, look at the "hill" in the middle of the crater. First, in the photo you posted:


Now, from the image I posted:


Which one has more detail? If you can show more detail in the image you posted than in the image I posted I will agree with you that detail was removed in the image I posted, but I can never agree that they added grey layers, as there's no way of knowing if they did it or not.

It's interesting to note that the first image (the one taken from the image you posted) has 256 shades of grey, while the second has only 95, but look at how they are distributed.

First image.


Second image.


As you can see, the first image, although with more shades of grey, looks more like a black and white image, as almost all those shades are in the extremes (but with very few pixels along all the values), while the second image has a more natural distribution of the values.

Now look at what happens when I change the levels to make the second image look more like the first and resize it to 200%.

It now has 256 shades of grey, most of the detail is gone and the histogram shows the same type of distribution of the shades of grey.





That's what I was thinking, and that's why I didn't have the time to post it until I got home at the end of the day.