Disclose.tv

jetxvii · **Posted:** Wed Dec 16, 2009 10:32 pm

you know out of all the pictures posted of the "MOON LANDING" sites, I did not see anything but white dots, and shitty black holes surrounded by build up of moon surface...we can see clear up shots of my backyard on google earth from a satellite, but yet no Apollo 11 moon landing site...

try again.

@ terrac1de512

we are still waiting for the Moon landing photos you can see from your back yard, or a link to the telescope you have, its rather easy you can go to google and type in the telescope you have and see if it is available online. or you could give me the specs and I could go check it out, if it can really see the moon landing site I am very interested as I want to win Millions for capturing the first photos of the moon landing site..

I would also like to say that after seeing all these Videos and evidence posted here, My analysis and thought process is now leaning more towards the "we didn't go stage", I still want to believe we went though.

jetxvii · **Posted:** Wed Dec 16, 2009 10:34 pm

LowSix wrote:

But that is a fake color map, hand applied by Escamilla.
That is such an incorrectly applied technique.
His painting process changes the luminosity mapping..(light and dark areas)
He would need the spectrographic analysis (color wise and color temperature wise) of EACH AND EVERY single element (chemical) seen in the soils to accurately render a color map. Thats not what he did.
He took a paintbrush, and useda combination of Blending Modes to arrive at a graphically pleasing color interpretation...

Value wise, it is almost entirely inaccurate. (value being light to dark)

That is not how color mapping works.
You can take a telescope and see what color the moon is.

Serious.
Think about it.

Jose Escamilla is such a crack pot, did you see his "Moon rising"?, he at first said he applied the "real terrain" picture manipulation, then later captioned it as the real colors of the moon... what a crazy Bafoon

terrac1de512 · **Joined:** Tue Oct 13, 2009 6:09 am **Posts:** 323

LowSix wrote:

But that is a fake color map, hand applied by Escamilla.
That is such an incorrectly applied technique.
His painting process changes the luminosity mapping..(light and dark areas)
He would need the spectrographic analysis (color wise and color temperature wise) of EACH AND EVERY single element (chemical) seen in the soils to accurately render a color map. Thats not what he did.
He took a paintbrush, and useda combination of Blending Modes to arrive at a graphically pleasing color interpretation...

Value wise, it is almost entirely inaccurate. (value being light to dark)

That is not how color mapping works.
You can take a telescope and see what color the moon is.

Serious.
Think about it.

NO, I downloaded that picture from the USGS website myself (and its not there anymore..hmmm), Escamilla hand painted the APOLLO pictures, not the CLEMENTINE pictures which that image I posted is from. The clementine color cameras used a color wheel to make the colors at least 98% accurate to Earth colors. There are images taken of the moon with 10" and larger telescopes here on earth that show a lot of color too, especially the Aristarchus region which has been the site of TLP for over a hundred years.
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients ... ar_02.html

terrac1de512 · **Joined:** Tue Oct 13, 2009 6:09 am **Posts:** 323

@ jetxvii
I never stated that I have a telescope that I can see anything with.. all I have is a crappy 200.00 Galileo reflector, where did that come from?

lowsix · **Joined:** Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:19 am **Posts:** 9999

terrac1de512 wrote:

LowSix wrote:

But that is a fake color map, hand applied by Escamilla.
That is such an incorrectly applied technique.
His painting process changes the luminosity mapping..(light and dark areas)
He would need the spectrographic analysis (color wise and color temperature wise) of EACH AND EVERY single element (chemical) seen in the soils to accurately render a color map. Thats not what he did.
He took a paintbrush, and useda combination of Blending Modes to arrive at a graphically pleasing color interpretation...

Value wise, it is almost entirely inaccurate. (value being light to dark)

That is not how color mapping works.
You can take a telescope and see what color the moon is.

Serious.
Think about it.

NO, I downloaded that picture from the USGS website myself (and its not there anymore..hmmm), Escamilla hand painted the APOLLO pictures, not the CLEMENTINE pictures which that image I posted is from. The clementine color cameras used a color wheel to make the colors at least 98% accurate to Earth colors. There are images taken of the moon with 10" and larger telescopes here on earth that show a lot of color too, especially the Aristarchus region which has been the site of TLP for over a hundred years.
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients ... ar_02.html

My apologies then.
I thought that was Joses image.

i will look for similar photos because the luminosity maps dont match what i can see with my eyes and what telescopes pick up, and i would like to understand the technical reason why.

I will look for further clementine stuff.

Thanks...and truly..i was mistaken.

lowsix · **Joined:** Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:19 am **Posts:** 9999

Well, i looked at this:
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients ... 80_lrg.png

and i didnt see anything of the sort of luminosity blowout and color saturation of the more extreme examples that float around. "The Living Moon" is NOWHERE on the level of credibility for me, but i will wait until i can find colored clementine images.

(which i might, and will readily admit to)

So let me ask this:

If you admit that Lovell said that the color was like Plaster of Paris, why does his qualified objective survey of it deserve dismissal?

Im sure that if he came back, said it was slate grey, when in reality it was green blue purple and white, he would be summarily fired...or at a minimum censured. Why would he lie?

cornbread714 · **Joined:** Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:11 pm **Posts:** 8910

terrac1de512 wrote:

ironshroom wrote:

if you're talking about that super saturated picture of the moon, you might want to think again, if not i apologize.

If that was directed at me, I was referring to Apollo 13. Jim Lovell said in response to mission control when asked "what does the old Moon look like from 60 miles" his response "Grey, no color looks like plaster of paris".. Clearly this is NOT the case from what we know about the moon today. See the following as example among others (my personal favorite)

Is it possible that the brightness and glare to the human eye could account for the "plaster of paris" effect? And that the cameras were able to tone down the glare through aperture and shutter length settings?

Just a thought... :think:

spock · **Joined:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 7:12 pm **Posts:** 10922

LowSix wrote:

You can take a telescope and see what color the moon is.

Serious.
Think about it.

Let me ask this. If you're looking at the moon through a telescope, wouldn't the colors be skewed by our own atmosphere?

terrac1de512 · **Joined:** Tue Oct 13, 2009 6:09 am **Posts:** 323

LowSix wrote:

Well, i looked at this:
http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients ... 80_lrg.png

and i didnt see anything of the sort of luminosity blowout and color saturation of the more extreme examples that float around. "The Living Moon" is NOWHERE on the level of credibility for me, but i will wait until i can find colored clementine images.

(which i might, and will readily admit to)

So let me ask this:

If you admit that Lovell said that the color was like Plaster of Paris, why does his qualified objective survey of it deserve dismissal?

Im sure that if he came back, said it was slate grey, when in reality it was green blue purple and white, he would be summarily fired...or at a minimum censured. Why would he lie?

he would lie if the whole Apollo program was a pr stunt to hide the real space program going on behind the scenes using antigravity propulsion, etc.. I have serious doubts that rocket technology alone could get us to the moon without killing the occupants of the spacecraft, maybe now, but highly doubtful back in the 60's. The LEM was never fully tested, and all of the technology involved at the time was experimental. The Clementine satellite I'm sure was orbiting at least 60 miles off the surface of the moon and you can see how colorful those images are. When we look at the moon, we are seeing it through the shroud of an atmosphere and we are seeing an object without oceans etc.. the further away, the more subtle the colors.
Sorry, not trying to create controversy, just to try to get my point across so u understand it.. take it or leave it..

The USGS moved a lot of their clementine stuff, Im trying to find it now.

terrac1de512 · **Joined:** Tue Oct 13, 2009 6:09 am **Posts:** 323

OK, some good clementine mosaics of the moon available HERE
http://ser.sese.asu.edu/MOON/clem_color.html

and a lot more info on the Clementine mission HERE
http://filer.case.edu/~sjr16/advanced/2 ... ntine.html

Topics		Author	Replies	Views	Last post
{ RELATED_TOPICS }
	Neda's death(faked) [ Go to page: 1, 2 ]	zaff4444	13	680	Thu Jan 14, 2010 3:47 am bahb3
	History Books - FAKED	pindz	3	214	Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:34 pm aragajag
	Leftists Caught Red-Handed: ‘Burning Sheep’ Libel Was Faked	proto	0	97	Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:49 pm proto
	mission impossible , cant connect to dtv	neilglfc	8	251	Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:54 pm eisleo
	Manned mission to an asteroid proposed	abyssdnb	0	109	Tue Oct 27, 2009 10:21 am abyssdnb

Disclose.tv

Sub Navigation Links

The most compelling evidence that Apollo mission was faked