Why is there an 800 pound Gorilla on the Moon that NASA refuses to address? To date, no success at getting NASA to release theses images without the airbrushing. To date, NASA refuses to comment. What is going on?
The freedom of information act, does not work if it is deem a matter of national security. What is threatening about structures lost in time.
Who specifically said it's a matter of national security?
Make this easy: who are the people on the video? They haven't been redacted in the interest of national security, obviously, so there is the possibility of fact-checking there. Otherwise, they are just a bunch of anonymous voices on a video.
You have presented no evidence that the video is anything but total fiction.
This whole thing smells like a really badly done conspiracy video. I wonder if this is what the "alien autopsy" people have been up to lately.
Egad man. I am just saying NASA, stop ignoring the repeated requests through the FOIA. IF there is nothing to the pictures simply tell us. Moreover, why has it been declared a matter of national security.
I have yet to see any evidence that anything HAS been declared a matter of national security. Link, please...
You read the excerpt of page 6?
Why in Thor's name do people respond to any Micheal threads? 7 pages so far...
Probably because it's entertaining. I'm not really sure what the reason is for the more serious responses.
I'm kind of new here. Is he a troll?
Michael, you've said that you aren't making any claims and that you are just wanting to know what's in the pictures. This is true, but perhaps your reputation precedes you? I do seem to remember you starting a thread specifically about NASA covering up the 'towers' on the moon. Because of your history of this topic, I feel it's easy for many to assume that you do think there is a cover-up hear, even if you do appear to be treading more lightly this time around.
As for the video... I'd say that the yellow highlighted areas didn't look like anything to me when they weren't highlighted. The circular speckled 'colony' near the Apollo 11 landing site is actually addressed on Google Moon. It explains it to be a 'processing artifact'. As for the blurred out 'towers' and the like... I've seen similar blurred 'object' in stitched images before. Every time I've seen this sort of thing, it's always been a product of a stitching and/or resolution issue.Plus if these smudges were a cover up, why are they so obvious. I could easily scrub out these smudges so that you wouldn't be able to tell they were there. Surely NASA should be able to do at least as good.
Let's also not forget that any of these things are easily self-checked with a half decent telescope if they are on the near side. Also, may I ask why you're only concerned with NASA here? After all, NASA weren't the only ones to image and land on the moon. Perhaps NASA and Russia are in a joint cover-up...
I'll agree that NASA should just issue a quick statement, but am unsure that it would actually cause the conspiracy theorists to change their thinking. I do think it's unlikely that there's anything unusual in those images, but I can't honestly rule that possibility out 100%. I can tell you that I've never seen anything odd in my telescope though.
One problem is that 23,000 photos from the dark side of the Moon are missing.
And the photos from the dark side of the moon are in question. Thus land based telescopes can neither confirm nor deny these anomalies. I just posted above an excerpt addressing attempting to retrieve these photographs using the FOIA.
Michael, have you ever watched a professional photographer at work? For every decent photo, they take maybe 20 or 50 bad shots that get rejected. To build the detailed mosaic of the dark side of the moon, NASA had to take MILLIONS of photos and stitch them together. For there to be only 23,000 that were rejected because of redundancy, spoilage by cosmic rays, bad angles, etc., actually shows what an amazingly good job NASA did in building the mapping satellites and cameras. Should they hang onto huge volumes of scientifically useless material just to make conspiracy nuts happy?
Besides, you obviously don't trust NASA's word, why would you trust anything they said, if it didn't confirm your preconceived notions?
You are making an assumption. nothing wrong with that. we simple want to know the true because our tax dollars payed for this mission.
If the photos were redacted for reasons of national security, then maybe national security is involved. Maybe explaining WHY national security would be involved would be too much information and would subvert the purpose of redacting the photos. I'm not a Wikileaks person who believes there should never ever be any secrets.