Mars Anomaly Home Page Comments Page Book Evidence Page Report Listings Main Directory Page

MORE MOON EVIDENCE-3a

Report #151

November 16, 2008

Forward to Part-3b

This two part report is about Moon evidence that may or may not be real. The first part is about general image tampering in the Moon science data. I go to this trouble because you should at least be aware that the credibility of the data in general is often very questionable and so caution is advised in approaching anomalous information within it. The second part will be about some interesting anomalies and then it will be up to you to determine what you think about it all.



.

The above first image is a wide Apollo 17 EVA 1 ALSEP panorama image on the Moon demonstrating the context scene with the yellow arrow pointing out the location of the evidence spots in question for any who wish to do a follow-up search behind me on this. The evidence consists of two duplicated identical rocks in the terrain. The left second image shows a 100% full resolution view of the two rocks and the third right image shows a 200% zoom view of the two rocks so that there can be no mistaking that they are identical except for some slight light highlighting differences between them.

.

The above fourth image is a wide Apollo 17 Station 5 panorama image on the Moon again demonstrating the context scene with the yellow arrow pointing out the location of the evidence spot in question. The evidence once again consists of two duplicated identical rocks in the terrain when only one is real. Again the fifth left image shows a 100% full resolution view of the two rocks and the sixth right image shows the 200% zoom view of the two rocks so that there can be no mistaking that they are identical and duplicates of each other.

As you can see, these last two objects look a little like rodents don't they. Note the identical small rocks in the foreground right beside the two "rodents." Note also the two identical rocks in the background immediately behind the "rodents." One of these latter rocks may not be immediately apparent without a closer look because the one of the right is cleverly washed with sunlight highlights. Yes I'm also aware of the tiny flying sauser looking object to the immediate left of the "rodent" on the left and make no issue of it except to acknowledge its presence.

The reason that I'm showing you this twice over is to conclusively demonstrate that someone at official level has clearly been messing with and in this science data creating information there that isn't real and that it goes in the official record in this manner. Further, you should know that this was some very expert graphics work very difficult to detect except for the recognition factor of the obvious duplicated rocks. We are just lucky to be able to detect this at all.

You should know that these panorama images are mosaics of multiple small images attached together to form the whole. You should also know that the smaller images producing these particular evidence scenes found here at AS17-147-22552 for the Apollo 17 EVA 1 ALSEP panorama and at AS17-145-22159 for the Apollo 17 Station 5 panorama do not have these rock duplications in them. In other words, the duplications and false data are limited to the wide panorama images and not the source images for these evidence spots.

Upon reflecftion there is no telling how much of this goes undetected that does not involve easy recognition rocks. As for myself, I checked only a very few of the panorama images, quickly ran across this evidence, and did not look any further because I had the sample evidence I needed to prove my point. So there are likely more of them to be found.

.

The above seventh image on the left and eighth image on the right presented at full 100% resolution demonstrate a unique artifact flaw in the visuals that extends into the image from the side edge and from the various band lines separating upper and lower bands in this Lunar Orbiter III science data. These are just representative samples. This evidence is actually all over the place and plentiful in the data both as to this particular flaw and many other flaws and duplications not touched on here in this reporting.

This evidence is very similar in principle to the type of image tampering evidence reported on in my Report #149. It shows over a number of bands from two different images what the artifact looks like untouched by surrounding terrain evidence features as well as what it looks like where terrain features have impacted and/or distorted it as pointed out with yellow arrows. It also demonstrates how the same artifact appears on different sides of these two images and repeats from band to band in any one image.

When the artifact is distorted or deformed by a terrain feature, this demonstrates that the terrain is a layer that was added after the artifact was formed in the film and/or scanning process. If the artifact had only been introduced after the terrain layer, then the artifact would be fully formed crossing over the terrain feature without being influenced in shape by that terrain feature.

When the terrain feature does deform the artifact, this demonstrates that the terrain is actually a map layer laid down over a preexisting layer containing the artifact. In other words, first would come the original scene, then the original image tamper, then the scanning flaw, then the subsequent false layer laid downover it all. That in turn means that the original scene likely contained blanketing type image tampering applications of the 1960s and 1970s that would of have been otherwise too obvious without this recently added false layer covering over them and blending in with them giving the image visual uniformity.

..

The above ninth through twelfth images all demonstrate the number seven in the terrain the corner of which is pointed out in each image by a yellow arrow. Note that these represent four different Lunar Orbiter III images. Note as well that this is just a small sampling of this type of evidence and there are many more examples of this with this "7" in them.

What we have here is the number "7" that has been removed but inadequately from an earlier information layer below the layer that we see. To the left of this number you will see a irregular horizontal mark that also appears repeated in each image in the exact same spot in relation to the number "7.". This is almost certainly part of another letter or number that was more completely removed but not quite all of it successfully. There could have also been others more completely removed.

The reason that the number "7" character looks so spotty and indistinct to varying degrees from image to image is because an partially opaque (partially transparent) false layer containing the false impact craters and other terrain features has been laid down over the earlier scene. The opaque smudge background of this false upper layer blends in with the previous scene most likely specifically blending with the heavy and visually obvious smudge applications hiding information in that earlier scene and adding false terrain detail to visually confuse the original scene. Of course, since the terrain details of the false layer varies from image to image, the degree of obscuring the "7" also varies from image to image.

Who ever did this probably thought that the characters like the number "7" were sufficiently erased and that the false layer and its confusion detail would thoroughly cover them over hiding them from view. We are fortunate that someone's technical incompetency prevailed and allowed this little bit of number "7" truth to peak/print through to warn us of this maniplative deceit's presence. Now, with this information in hand, do you have any confidence that what you are looking is real in the 7th through 12th images above?

That is my point here. The 1960s and 1970s Moon science data have these kind of credibility problems and extreme caution must be the exercised when trying to interpret evidence in this data. Why? Because you never know whether you are looking at something real or not. To complicate it even more, there is evidence that false anomalous information that is tantalizing but ultimately never conclusive is also added into the data to spark interest, keep debate going, and keep the funding money pipes open.

Also, this latter visual obfuscation principle can serve more than one purpose. There is the one mentioned above but also to confuse legitimate data that gets through the obfuscation tacticals by mistake. For example, the Moon's surface is litered with tubing (I'll report on that at another time) both in long lengths and many shorter piece lengths likely as abandoned debris. Too much of this type of evidence gets through the obfuscation processes so the secrecy answer is to add yet more of this kind of evidence mixing it all together so that they can claim it is all thread, hairs, etc. introduced in the scanning process. This tactic works just fine on the trusting and that is the bulk of the population.

In any case, you've been exposed to three different sample types of insight into the Moon data secrecy obfuscation tacticals in the above reporting that might give you pause and warning to be cautious. Now you may also have a better appreciation of what a researcher like myself has to go through in trying to figure what may be real and what isn't in this data. I've presented this side of this credibility and trust issue because the trusting side is already long established and does not require its side to be presented here. Now, with this exposure and its note of caution, let's get on with some anomaly evidence in the next Part-2 of this report at the link below.

Forward to Part-3b

DOCUMENTATION

All report imaging here has been drawn from the large .tif images available at each of the links below.

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollopanoramas : Scroll down about mid-way on the page of panorama thumbnails to the Apollo 17 section. There click on the third thumbnail image from the top which is the "Apollo 17 EVA 1 View from ALSEP Station" that is the source of my 1st, 2nd, and 3rd images in this report. Next click on the eighth thumbnail image from the top which is the "Apollo 17 Station 5" that is the source of my 4th, 5th and 6th images in this report.

http://ser.sese.asu.edu/LO/lo3-32-h1right.html: This link accesses the official Lunar Orbiter III lo3-32-h1right science data image that is the source of the 7th and 9th image evidence here in this reporting.

http://ser.sese.asu.edu/LO/lo3-46-h1a.html: This link accesses the official Lunar Orbiter III lo3-46-h1a science data image that is the source of the 8th image evidence here in this reporting.

http://ser.sese.asu.edu/LO/lo3-32-h1left.html: This link accesses the official Lunar Orbiter III lo3-32-h1left science data image that is the source of the 10th image evidence here in this reporting.

http://ser.sese.asu.edu/LO/lo3-20-h1a.html: This link accesses the official Lunar Orbiter III lo3-20-h1a science data image that is the source of the 11th image evidence here in this reporting.

http://ser.sese.asu.edu/LO/lo3-20-h1d.html : This link accesses the official Lunar Orbiter III lo3-20-h1d science data image that is the source of the 12th image evidence here in this reporting.






Moon Evidence Directory Tampering Evidence Directory Warefare Evidence Directory Strange Evidence Directory Civilization Evidence Directory Biological Evidence Directory Water Evidence Directory