Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2010 - 11:40am PT
|
I don't have time to get into it at the moment, labs all day today, but can anyone chime in who knows before I blow Skept's arguments out of the water later when I do have the time?
How wrong you are Skept.
I can just hear it now, "He sunk my battleship of an arguement."
And it will be fun doing so.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 12:16pm PT
|
Here's some more 'fun' for you Klimmer.
Explain why the clearly seen features in the box below of the faked Apollo 20 pics looks nothing like the undisputed Apollo 15 pics.
This area is part of the area that is needed to be cleared and moved back in order to make the 'nose' more apparent and distinct from the natural ridge it was in.
That area looks totally different on the left below and in any of the other pics Klimmer, what gives?
So you see it's a fools game to compare small features in pics with different resolution and washout when there are larger features that point in the other direction.
The originator never intended these pics to be a hoax. He said they were to only excite the imagination, but conspiracy droids like yourself had their imagination excited as well.
|
|
rectorsquid
climber
Lake Tahoe
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 12:19pm PT
|
Klimmer,
Have you considered that the government conspiracy is not to cover up the ark on the moon but to fake it just like the first moon landing was fake? It's a fake done by the government to trick you. Yes, you. And your falling for it.
I think "they" want to keep you from doing much of anything else and it's working pretty well from what I can see on this forum.
Dave
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 20, 2010 - 03:05pm PT
|
Skept, HJ, and Monolith:
I will get back. It is a busy day. You guys are making it easy for me.
Remote Sensing, Photogrammetry, and GIS are part of my degree.
I also worked in Environmental Consulting for 5 years working with aerials and mapping vegetation communities etc. day in and day out, before entering teaching. And I continue my Earth Science and Physics education as all teachers do. More GIS, and more Remote Sensing courses using ENVI etc.
You clearly do not know what you are talking about.
Rectorsquid,
No point in me responding to childish responses or behavior.
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 04:18pm PT
|
Sure Klimmer, show us the pic from the Apollo archives that clearly has those features.
Not some hashed up stereo pair image that only you can create and see.
And list the procedures you used step by step starting with the source images so anyone can repeat.
That is fundamental to the scientific method Klimmer.
|
|
Skeptimistic
Mountain climber
La Mancha
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 07:24pm PT
|
You clearly do not know what you are talking about
I, for one, look forward to something cogent and well-documented from you. I'm sure this will be spectacular!
|
|
rectorsquid
climber
Lake Tahoe
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 07:36pm PT
|
Rectorsquid,
No point in me responding to childish responses or behavior.
I was not there when the photos were taken nor on the spacecraft that took the pictures. I must assume one of two conspiracies. One is a cover-up to keep me from knowing the truth about the ark on the moon. The other is someone trying to convince me that there is actually an ark on the moon when there is no ark. For all I know, you are involved in the conspiracy to convince people that this ark is real when you know that it is not real.
Shouldn't it be part of a conspiracy discussion to pose the idea that it is not the government hiding this stuff that is the conspiracy but actually all of those who say they saw this or took the pictures, who are conspiring?
From a complete outsider point-of-view, I have always wondered if all of the people who say they saw UFO's up close or got abducted were in on some big joke and trying to trick the rest of us for the fun of it. After all, they can't all be crazy in the same way. On the other hand, they could easily be in collusion.
Dave
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 07:50pm PT
|
In the 1970s and 1980s the mentality of the "War on Drugs" ensured that no research was done with psychedelics at all. The twenty year hiatus was ended in 1990 by Rick Strassman MD, a professor of psychiatry at the University of New Mexico, who conducted a DEA-approved study administering the powerful hallucinogen DMT (dimethyltryptamine) to human volunteers. At the end of the study, five years later, nearly all the volunteers reported that the DMT sessions had been amongst the most profound experiences of their lives. Intriguingly around 80 per cent also reported that DMT had transported their consciousness to seamlessly convincing parallel realms where they encountered and received teachings from intelligent non-human beings. In a number of cases the beings (sometimes construed as "aliens", sometimes as "spirits", sometimes as "angels", sometimes even as "elves" or fairies") stated they were pleased the volunteers had discovered "this technology" -- i.e. DMT -- since they would now be able to communicate with them more easily!
Edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyltryptamine
I wonder if Klimmer and friends were some of the volunteers?
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 07:59pm PT
|
It's interesting, I have heard the same from friends who have dabbled in DMT. The elves.... They say that your trip isn't successful if you don't find them.
|
|
Bad Climber
climber
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 08:00pm PT
|
Klimmer: Sorry if I missed this one, but have you done any cutting-edge work on cattle mutilations? I think that one needs your attention, too! Nothing like mangled cow lips to get me all hot and bothered.
BAd
|
|
lostinshanghai
Social climber
someplace
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 08:12pm PT
|
Klimmer,
Since you must have or use or have used in the past WGEO 5.0 and other software on georeferencing,, geoimaging and coordinate transformation software, guess you have knowledge as well on interactive finite-element simulation system for modeling 3D and 2D flow, mass and heat transport processes in groundwater and vadose zone. Portion of Earth between the land surface and the zone of saturation like 600 meters+ below the surface.
yes! oops you kind of blew it on the end of the world 2012. Scratch one off the list.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 08:15pm PT
|
Photogrammetry...part of my degree...
Not sure how you did, but it doesn't sound like a good program if you did well because you're doing a poor job of interpretation on these.
Check out the shadowing and length of shadows in yellow. Amazing how with the lower sun azimuth of the AS20 photo that all the shadows grow longer except the one the 'ark' is in - it miraculously stays the same length as in the AS15 shot rather than being longer down to somewhere around the green line. The shadowing in the AS15 shot is entirely self-consistent versus in the AS20 shot where the shadowing is not and the shadow projections off the rim above the 'ark' should be burying it as well as crossing the upper hull as opposed to it being fully lit. For it to be completely out of the shadow it would have to be entirely floating in space above the ground with a very different shadow profile under it, though that would also be in the larger shadow projection of the rim above. Ridiculous in every respect.
Also, the ratio of various pairs of lines drawn between crater centers is different between the two photos. The AS20 photos are entirely shopped if not modeled.
That and, yet again, there was no AS20 Saturn launch.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 09:00pm PT
|
Nice catch, Andy!
So Klimmer's "source" is plagiarized from fish-wrap? Why am I not surprised?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 09:50pm PT
|
Note also that a launch out of Vandenberg for a standard translunar injection would require an eastward launch which would have the Saturn first stage dropping over the US - messy business for a 'secret' launch. Vandenberg is used for polar orbit launches.
|
|
TomCochrane
Trad climber
I've lost track...
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 11:05pm PT
|
The Earth's most powerful particle collider near Geneva, Switzerland, will soon start smashing iron ions together in November 2010, to get closer to the quarks and gluons that make up protons and neutrons. So far, the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven National Lab in New York has shown that quarks and gluons behave as if they are in a liquid soup, but what will happen at the higher LHC temperatures close to the beginning of the Big Bang? CERN's latest news bulletin says, “Parallel universes, unknown forms of matter, extra dimensions... These are not the stuff of cheap science fiction, but very concrete physics theories that scientists are trying to confirm with the LHC and other experiments.”
http://www.earthfiles.com/index.php?category=Headline+News
|
|
Skeptimistic
Mountain climber
La Mancha
|
|
|
Oct 20, 2010 - 11:53pm PT
|
Klimmer's esoteric sources revealed:
Like I said in an earlier post in this thread, "Best troll post of the year, hands down!"
|
|
monolith
climber
Berkeley, CA
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2010 - 12:52am PT
|
BTW Klimmer, you never pointed to the boulders in the undisputed pics. You only pointed to them in the pic you dispute and the pic we dispute.
Need I remind you what you prommised:
Yes, by all means go to the original and zoom in as close as you want in both images. The natural feature is clearly visible in the originals but not in the altered faked image at the top of this post.
I'm not seeing them Klimmer. Will you please hold my hand.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 21, 2010 - 03:05am PT
|
Do you have any idea what a "stereo pair" is technically? A true stereo pair is shot by 2 coordinated cameras from slightly different angles at the same time. Not 2 images taken miles and years apart by 2 completely different spacecraft (if you accept that the "Apollo 20" mission happened at all...). As a "science" teacher, you must be aware that celestial bodies don't follow the exact same path and therefore will be subject to changes in lighting from the angle of the sun.
Furthermore, you are trying to mix apples and oranges by making this pair from an official image and an unofficial one. Yes, one is probably photoshopped, but you know which one I'll believe.
Edit: Here's how it's done correctly. And if you're going to tout your image's veracity, you need to show some scientific methodology that is reproducible.
How to do stereo photography
The technique is very simple - as outlined in the introduction above. Care must be taken to photograph the same sky (or scene as in your moon pics) with exactly the same settings and do the two exposures as soon as possible after each other (and we're not talking years here), in order to photograph the sky (or scene as in your moon pics) statically.
Skept,
Skept, Skept, Skept . . . you are making this too easy.
Do you have any idea what a "stereo pair" is technically? A true stereo pair is shot by 2 coordinated cameras from slightly different angles at the same time. Not 2 images taken miles and years apart by 2 completely different spacecraft
I'm pretty sure I do, since I've had many courses within my degree on just that, Remote Sensing, both with Aerial and Satellite imagery, GIS and Cartography etc. And many years of environmental consulting work experience doing just that -- looking at Aerial and Satellite images and mapping from them. And I continue to do so, as well as taking additional course work.
No you are wrong. There are several methods to do 3D imagery. Yes, one method is to use a camera system that takes 2 simultaneous images at the same temporal moment, and same light. Specifically these cameras are used for dedicated stereograms. These types were used for many years after the advent of photography, hence the many antique stereograms available that people collect of wonderful geography, both physical and cultural.
But did you know that you can make a stereogram with just one camera and a tripod? Heck you don't even need a tripod. Take a picture with your digital camera (or film camera) slide sideways a few feet, take the exact same image or at least overlap it about 70%, same composition and scale, make sure there isn't a lot of motion in the image, and voila, when you view it with a stereoscope you will see it in amazing 3D.
This last method is the way aerial images (B&W and Color) are created with high resolution 9" x 9" negative images. One camera, consecutive shots with about 70% overlap. These are called aerial photo flight lines. Watch the incredible DVD: "NGS - Taller Than Everest." Let the late Bradford Washburn take you through the science and art of Cartography and the making of the finest map of Mt. Everest ever. You will come away with a very good understanding and appreciation of the state of art in cartography. And you will then really appreciate the science and art of remote sensing, and how important stereo images are in the making of maps. One camera, many 100s of feet apart, 1000s of feet, or even miles apart with overlapping images. The AGL determines the best image separation distances. The higher AGL the greater the image separation distance.
Then there is the anaglyph method, the red and blue, taking 2 different overlapping images converting them to red and blue and separating them at the proper distance.
Then there are other techniques (many actually) . . . like using 2 frames from a film, DVD, or video, and screen capturing 2 immediate images that are very close in sequence to alleviate movement, but that significantly overlap from a close perspective. Bingo 3D.
The point is that those stereo images made from aerial or satellite images primarily made for mapping, geography, geology, astrogeology, and all the Earth Science purposes for interpretation and mapping etc. use the same technique as described above. One camera. Different times. Separated by a long distance, but overlapping usually by 70%. This is how it is done.
Not 2 images taken miles and years apart by 2 completely different spacecraft
Not true. We do it here on Earth all as well as other Planetary Bodies. We make stereograms from images from different cameras, different aircraft/spacecraft, even miles apart, as long as they are overlapping significantly and from nearly the same perspective, but it doesn't have to be exact, not even close. We can scale images from 2 different sources and it works very well.
We do temporal studies to see change with stereograms all the time. Same physical geography in the background, but perhaps the vegetation has changed or the water level has changed over THE YEARS etc.
So grab your stereoscope:
Here are many stereograms from the Moon . . . this is a very interesting study from the Apollo missions. You will even learn about stereoscopic images and how they are produced and their value . . .
http://history.nasa.gov/SP-362/cover.htm
And temporal studies with stereograms . . . view the terrain in 3D, then close one eye and see, then close the other eye and see the change. Temporal studies. There you go.
http://serc.carleton.edu/eyesinthesky2/week2/index.html
Edit: Here's how it's done correctly. And if you're going to tout your image's veracity, you need to show some scientific methodology that is reproducible.
Really? I've already proven you don't know what you are talking about. I don't think you know scientific methodology. I have always shared what I have done, no tricks ever.
How to do stereo photography
The technique is very simple - as outlined in the introduction above. Care must be taken to photograph the same sky (or scene as in your moon pics) with exactly the same settings and do the two exposures as soon as possible after each other (and we're not talking years here), in order to photograph the sky (or scene as in your moon pics) statically.
I think I know. This is just one way to make 3D images. There are many. But one way is often done for the Earth Sciences, and that is the way they did it with the Apollo missions, and the way I did it. It is allowable to overlap images separated by many years to view in 3D. Temporal studies. And in this respect, it is a perfect application. Apollo 15, Apollo 17, and yes "Apollo 20" images make perfect stereograms for studying and cross-comparing. That is exactly what I'm doing.
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhhhh.
Furthermore, you are trying to mix apples and oranges by making this pair from an official image and an unofficial one. Yes, one is probably photoshopped, but you know which one I'll believe.
Nope. It is called comparative studies in space and time (temporal studies). That is exactly what you do. Open one eye then the other. Match up all detail. Are the images viewable in 3D? Yes they are. Does all the detail match? Yes it does. Until you start to do the comparative study as I have then you do not know.
That would be the purpose of the comparative study wouldn't it? To see if the Apollo 20 images are faked. So far, from what I can tell they are authentic. Same massive object and same Lunar physical geography. Different resolution, but a perfect match. Yes, it is hard to compare a low resolution image that is shot with a panorama camera, to a image taken with higher resolution and closer and a normal aspect lense, but it is possible. Just have to go back and forth, back and forth. In the Apollo 15 images and Apollo 17 images I see the same exact detail within the Apollo 20 image considering differences in resolution. So far perfect match over and over again.
To fake this with a massive detailed 3D model and then to shoot it matching the Apollo 15 and Apollo 17 images perfectly is really beyond reason, not to mention the cost and for what an interent hoax? Hardly. Is everything regarding Apollo 20 true? No. I've talked about that plenty.
So far, I do think the Apollo 20 images are real. Perfect match.
Edit:
I'm getting to you others. Please be patient and wait for your public flogging in due time. lol.
|
|
Klimmer
Mountain climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 21, 2010 - 03:41am PT
|
Photogrammetry...part of my degree...
Not sure how you did, but it doesn't sound like a good program if you did well because you're doing a poor job of interpretation on these.
http://www.supertopo.com/photos/5/29/174377_1703_L.jpg
Credit: healyje
Check out the shadowing and length of shadows in yellow. Amazing how with the lower sun azimuth of the AS20 photo that all the shadows grow longer except the one the 'ark' is in - it miraculously stays the same length as in the AS15 shot rather than being longer down to somewhere around the green line. The shadowing in the AS15 shot is entirely self-consistent versus in the AS20 shot where the shadowing is not and the shadow projections off the rim above the 'ark' should be burying it as well as crossing the upper hull as opposed to it being fully lit. For it to be completely out of the shadow it would have to be entirely floating in space above the ground with a very different shadow profile under it, though that would also be in the larger shadow projection of the rim above. Ridiculous in every respect.
Also, the ratio of various pairs of lines drawn between crater centers is different between the two photos. The AS20 photos are entirely shopped if not modeled.
That and, yet again, there was no AS20 Saturn launch.
HJ,
Thanks for showing to everyone that the images from Apollo 15 are taken with a panorama camera. It is not a normal aspect lense. Yes it elongates features.
And thanks for reconfirming that Apollo 15 image is a slightly different aspect and perspective than Apollo 20. I have said this over and over.
Check out the original source:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS15-P-9625
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/frame/?AS15-P-9630
Image Collection: Panoramic
Mission: 15
Magazine: P
Revolution: 38
Latitude / Longitude: 19° S / 117.5° E
Lens Focal Length: 24 inch
Camera Look: Forward
Camera Altitude: 117 km
Sun Elevation: 27°
Stereo Pair: AS15-P-9630
Film Type: 3414
Film Width: 5 inch
Image Width: 45.24 inch
Image Height: 4.5 inch
Film Color: black & white
Index Map: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/mapcatalog/apolloindex/apollo15/as15indexmap01/
Feature(s): DELPORTE, SOUTHWEST OF
IZSAK, NORTH OF
Image Collection: Panoramic
Mission: 15
Magazine: P
Revolution: 38
Latitude / Longitude: 19° S / 117.5° E
Lens Focal Length: 24 inch
Camera Look: Aft
Camera Altitude: 117 km
Sun Elevation: 27°
Stereo Pair: AS15-P-9625
Film Type: 3414
Film Width: 5 inch
Image Width: 45.24 inch
Image Height: 4.5 inch
Film Color: black & white
Index Map: http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/mapcatalog/apolloindex/apollo15/as15indexmap01/
Feature(s): DELPORTE, SOUTHWEST OF
IZSAK, NORTH OF
Your shadow arguement is very, very wrong.
I'm tired. I'll argue later.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!