NASA's biggest lie to be exposed.

fabzilla · Post by **fabzilla** » 08-19-2005 01:50 PM

It appears even with the "bending" and refracting associated with the curvature and the surrounding structures in the backgrounds of a multitude of these photos that the "photographer" was in a similar position each time or the "light source" was conveniently throwing the same levels of illumination in the same directions and at the same angles.

Granted that environment and lacking the atmosphere, as suggested, to diffuse and redistribute the light amongst layers of compounds would not violate the basic laws of physics (or what we are lead to believe we know of them and their operations outside of our earthly realm) in any way shape or form, the odds of having these "shadows" appear disproportional to the primary source in multiple shots are incredibly to fantastic to calculate.

I may be way off base in my assumption but by the space between objects within the images a corrected curve could be calculated to input the angle of emination taking in for granted the height, distance, and realtive positioning of the onjects in relation to the pitch of the shadows cast.

Are there any elements of these shots that have a definitive scale that can be applied to them and referenced to "said" locations and positions as noted by the individuals that were there?

fab

All of that and not even mentioning the untapped, unknown actual history behind perceived history we have been told time and time again refrencing ancient civilizations with volumes of information implying the use of harmonic type devices on an almost planetary scale. If there were a technology long ago reuslting in the displacement of objects of enormous masses then wouldn't it also be feasibly applied to volumes of compounds within atmospheres as well?

Lying in a protected cell somewhere between myth and reality yet to be found and hidden away for reason?

It seems to be in the archaeology of it all and what has yet to be determined.

In case no one has posted this link

http://www.aulis.com/

there it is, check it out

Cpt Spike Mike · Post by **Cpt Spike Mike** » 08-19-2005 02:41 PM

After looking at the full-sized image of Alan Bean's painting I now feel that the lines on the bubbled faceplate are intentional, and not an artifact of the canvas grain. This is an artist's technique known as line gradient shading. A fine example of this type of shading can be found on the portrait of any US currency bill.

I stand corrected by myself.

johnlear · Post by **johnlear** » 08-19-2005 05:08 PM

This is the overhead photo Lunar Orbiter V M-155 of the area that LO II H-162.

johnlear · Post by **johnlear** » 08-19-2005 05:16 PM

This is the original LOV M-155.

edited to add link to enlargement
Click thumbnail above -Dale

KDianeC · Post by **KDianeC** » 08-19-2005 06:35 PM

I'm sorry, but I just don't see it.
I see no difference in both those photo's you posted John. I blew them up to 540 X 698 and still didn't see anything different.

johnlear · Post by **johnlear** » 08-19-2005 06:50 PM

KDianeC wrote: I'm sorry, but I just don't see it.
I see no difference in both those photo's you posted John. I blew them up to 540 X 698 and still didn't see anything different.

If you mean the last 2, I don't either. Need Dales help. Looks good in photoshop but doesn't get to the post.

Dale O Sea · Post by **Dale O Sea** » 08-19-2005 07:28 PM

KDianeC wrote: I'm sorry, but I just don't see it.
I see no difference in both those photo's you posted John. I blew them up to 540 X 698 and still didn't see anything different.

Hello KDianeC Just got here.

Here -->>

is a link to the full size image cropped out of the one John posted. click on it again and it gets very big - 1200x1305.

KDianeC · Post by **KDianeC** » 08-19-2005 08:02 PM

Dale OSea wrote: Hello KDianeC Just got here.

Here -->>
is a link to the full size image cropped out of the one John posted. click on it again and it gets very big - 1200x1305.

OH!! OH!! OH!! I think I see what John was talking about. Now if someone else can see it.

I blew it up really big earlier and didn't see a thing. Maybe because you added color to it this time.

Hi Dale. How are ya?

Dale O Sea · Post by **Dale O Sea** » 08-19-2005 08:22 PM

I'm fine and hope you are the same.

Fresno, eh? I have an aunt that lived in Fresno for many years. She's now in Vicalia, I believe.

I enhanced that a bit more to bring out some more contrast and also marked the offending area. It made it a bit larger for downloading - a shade over a megabyte. But that is the original size of the image John emailed me. Here's the text. I'm too lazy to type it.. :p

KDianeC · Post by **KDianeC** » 08-19-2005 08:28 PM

You highlighted one of them, why not highlight the others in that pic as well? LoL

*Off-Topic a bit*
Yea, Fresno by way of LaFollette, Tennessee. *35 miles N of Knoxville* I saw someone else in here say they were from TN also.

Visalia isn't that far from me.
*On-Topic now*

Dale O Sea · Post by **Dale O Sea** » 08-19-2005 08:55 PM

KDianeC wrote: You highlighted one of them, why not highlight the others in that pic as well? LoL

*Off-Topic a bit*
Yea, Fresno by way of LaFollette, Tennessee. *35 miles N of Knoxville* I saw someone else in here say they were from TN also.
Visalia isn't that far from me.
*On-Topic now*

I may not be understanding you- been a long day .. There was only one of the enlargements taken from that shot. It was the one in this post:
showthread.php?s=&postid=310755#post310755

Lakesider · Post by **Lakesider** » 08-19-2005 09:17 PM

Try as I might I don't think I see what the others are seeing, not saying there's nothing of note there, just can't wrap my brain around it. I'll keep on keeping on with this thread and sooner or later something will sink in.

johnlear · Post by **johnlear** » 08-19-2005 09:30 PM

Lakesider wrote: Try as I might I don't think I see what the others are seeing, not saying there's nothing of note there, just can't wrap my brain around it. I'll keep on keeping on with this thread and sooner or later something will sink in.

If it was easy it wouldn't have been kept a secret so long. I've had guests at my house and carefully shown them building on Copernicus and no, they just couldn't
see it.

Marlantis Buzz · Post by **Marlantis Buzz** » 08-19-2005 10:07 PM

fabzilla wrote: It appears even with the "bending" and refracting associated with the curvature and the surrounding structures in the backgrounds of a multitude of these photos that the "photographer" was in a similar position each time or the "light source" was conveniently throwing the same levels of illumination in the same directions and at the same angles.

Granted that environment and lacking the atmosphere, as suggested, to diffuse and redistribute the light amongst layers of compounds would not violate the basic laws of physics (or what we are lead to believe we know of them and their operations outside of our earthly realm) in any way shape or form, the odds of having these "shadows" appear disproportional to the primary source in multiple shots are incredibly to fantastic to calculate.

I may be way off base in my assumption but by the space between objects within the images a corrected curve could be calculated to input the angle of emination taking in for granted the height, distance, and realtive positioning of the onjects in relation to the pitch of the shadows cast.

Are there any elements of these shots that have a definitive scale that can be applied to them and referenced to "said" locations and positions as noted by the individuals that were there?

fab

All of that and not even mentioning the untapped, unknown actual history behind perceived history we have been told time and time again refrencing ancient civilizations with volumes of information implying the use of harmonic type devices on an almost planetary scale. If there were a technology long ago reuslting in the displacement of objects of enormous masses then wouldn't it also be feasibly applied to volumes of compounds within atmospheres as well?

Lying in a protected cell somewhere between myth and reality yet to be found and hidden away for reason?

It seems to be in the archaeology of it all and what has yet to be determined.

In case no one has posted this link

http://www.aulis.com/

there it is, check it out

Nicely done Fab. Well put and figured out. My answer to your questions toward the end is Yes. You have signatures involved here. Harmonic, geophysic, possibly/probably frequency applied to the surface from long ago by ancient artificial means. All of these combined can, might could create illusions...to hide whats really there or expose something at a certain time under certain conditions. Example...crop formations. geometric images exposed during hurricans, to mention a few. It all depends on how you look at it. Right place, right time. In fact everyone is doing well here. Nice work Spike.

KDianeC · Post by **KDianeC** » 08-19-2005 10:07 PM

Dale OSea wrote: I may not be understanding you- been a long day .. There was only one of the enlargements taken from that shot. It was the one in this post:
showthread.php?s=&postid=310755#post310755

Well maybe this will explain it better what I was talking about, here's a few 3D enhanced geometrical shapes pinpointed out, There's also another one that wasn't pointed out. See if anyone can find it.