posted 08-27-2002 04:35 AM            

Forget the "moon hoaxers". This is out of their league and their comprehension.

Many people are unaware that the moon does rotate on its axis. (A full rotation of 29.9 days). At this rate, the moon shows approximately the same face towards the Earth for about 59% of it's surface. This is caused by the libration effect. Okay, enough science.

It is a fact that NASA has "hundreds" of images considered "CLASSIFIED" of various lunar mission imagery, as early as Ranger, the Lunar Orbiters 1-5 and including Apollo.

Later down the road Project Clementine came along and had an outstanding High Res camera on board that sent home some of the finest "CLASSIFIED" images you will probably never see. Clementine was used jointly by NASA and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization to acquire these hi res images of the moon, front and back.

Some of the Apollo missions detected Moon geysers (along the eastern edge of the Sea of Storms for example) and Moon volcanoes. They reported seeing many different colors on the moons back side, while the centers of some of the craters "glowed".

Later missions observed and reported unexplained haze clouds and color flashes in and around the crater Aristarchus.

A lot of this information is available to those who seek it. In the February 1972 National Geographic they make mention of some of these findings.

I don't want to be too long winded on the matter, but I am curious to why "CLASSIFIED" images of the moon would even exist.

What could they possibly show?

Why don't they want us to see it?

I would like to know if anyone out there has any other thoughts or factual info regarding the glowing lights et al.

Perhaps the astronauts know something that we do not.

I am aware that some of the collectSPACE members have close ties and personal friendships with some of the Apollo heroes, and I fully respect that and all of the privacy and confidentiality that goes along with it.

Maybe you know something that we don't.

Maybe you can share it, maybe not.

This probably isn't the forum for such info or is it?

Kind thoughts and words are welcome, and appreciated.

Aloha from Volcano Central

posted 08-29-2002 06:18 AM               

Where did you see that a particular image (or set of images) was/were "classified"?

posted 08-29-2002 11:34 AM            

I don't know about Ranger (although we might not wanted the Soviets to know the limits of our technology - and a good photograph of an identifiable crater on the Moon would tell the Soviets just about -everything- about our space imaging technology).

Now, as for Clementine, it was heavily derived from SDI/BMD technology, so it is not beyond the pale that some data (particularly guidance data) may yet be classified.

posted 08-29-2002 06:24 PM            

I’ve been a photographer for over 30 years and decided to review these images, just out of curiosity, which over the last 10 years or so revealed some interesting findings.

The images are all annotated with mission ID, mag #’s and an image or frame #’ as well.

In a number of instances, there were a small series of sequential frames, which were intentionally deleted, and then continue with the sequence of numbers.
When I questioned the National Air & Space folks, they informed me that the images on the disc were only the “unclassified images” released to the public.

That’s what sparked my curiosity.

Additionally, I found that in some of the frames either immediately before or after the missing frames, there appear to be anomalies. Strange lighting, like a haze or vapor or clouds in some instances.

There are quite a few images from Apollo, that are “unclassified” that reveal some interesting observations worth looking at. As soon as I get a chance, I will post the NASA ID #’s of a few of the unclassified ones available to the public. It will be difficult for me to pull the images off of the laser disc, but I have the #’s written down.

More soon. And thanks for the interest.

posted 08-29-2002 06:40 PM            

Try to locate these images. Hopefully they are the same ones I’m referring to on the disc. These are the NASA #'s

These are only a few unclassified from Apollo that in my opinion are interesting:

• AS 11-37-5438 and 36
  
• AS 11-42-6334
  
• AS 12-54-8118
  
• AS 12-49-7319 and 20
  
• AS 12-51-7553
  
• AS 13-60-8622
  
• AS 14-80-10439 (I need to double check this #)

posted 11-19-2002 09:00 PM            

Because of all the processing, "these" images should not be used for research purposes. They should only be used to select and identify images for use in a research project. Higher resolution products should be obtained for use in any scientific investigation.

• Magazine R AS 11-37-5438
  
• Magazine T AS 12-54-8118
  
• Magazine D AS 12-49-7319 compare to image AS 12-49-7318
  
• Magazine R AS 12-51-7552 and here.
  
• Magazine L AS 13-60-8622 and that's not the Earth - its too bright for one thing.

posted 11-20-2002 02:59 PM            

As I’ve stated before, the fact that many of the early images, including Apollo, are considered ”Classified”, and that’s what made me curious. What would make them classified?

Certainly Apollo didn’t have the Hi Res ability in the 60’s. Images were selected to be removed and labeled classified for a reason. I’m just REAL curious as to why.

WAWalsh, as far as Clementines Hi Res imagery, yes I agree that many of those images are probably classified because they reveal the capability of the recording sensors.

Remember it was Clementine that confirmed the presence of water on the moon in ‘94, something that a number of people speculated decades before.

Also, I am not suggesting that NASA or the government are covering up activity such as geysers or what appear to be vapor clouds on the moon, because they have been reported, photographed and documented. They are just not talking about it.

Additionally, there have been flashes of light and other anomalies that some of the Apollo astros have seen. My guess would be that it could very well be some sort of ‘volcanic activity’ on the moon.

Please refer to the opening post.

Again, I’m going on factual info obtained from NASA including mission reports and dialogue.

Please understand that this topic is directed towards everyone who has an open and inquisitive mind. Sort of like going ‘outside the box’ or drifting away from their ‘comfort zone’ for a while.

I’m not calling it a conspiracy at all, nor am I suggesting any explanations. It’s just an opportunity to have an open academic dialogue where anyone can participate and comment on.

Thanks for the interest and comments.

posted 11-20-2002 05:17 PM               

Having looked at the examples listed on a previous post I can think of a number of technical reasons common in photography for most if not all of the images; from lens flare and reflections to anomalies in processing.

I would hazard a guess that the very fact this discussion is taking place IS the reason for the "classified status" of some of the pictures. Whilst we can have an intelligent and informed discussion on the topic there are many out there who would not or could not; rather would use every day, common or garden photographic effects as the basis for UFO stories or dare I say it hoax moon landing conspiracies. Just ask Buzz Aldrin's friend...

A classic example of this is the famous shot of Charlie Duke along side the LRV with the famous "C" rock in the foreground. Often sited and as proof of a stage prop, left in frame in error when in fact it is simply a hair or spec that has become stuck to one of the various generation copies of the original image. A common problem as anybody who processes their own films at home will testify.

Regards,

posted 11-20-2002 07:54 PM               

Back on Rizz's topic, while the words are not there, the essence is certainly cover-up through omission. There is an implied accusation of scientific dishonesty. NASA has probably published 25 or so reports, plus annual updates, over the past 30 years on the findings and results from the Apollo missions. To suggest that eye witness observations, complimented through photographic evidence, exist, but have never been made public and has been wholly ignored for these reports directly accuses NASA of withholding information. Is it possible that such information exists and has been buried; I suppose that this is possible. The probability of this statistically, however, is 0+ at best.

I am unaware of any Apollo astronaut reporting seeing an active geyser or volcano on the Moon. I am, however, happy to be correct on that. Likewise, I have not seen any report suggesting that the Moon is little more than an inert rock at this stage in its life, but certainly it is possible that a molten core exists there. Either way, I would appreciate a citation to the astronaut observations so that I can see them in context.

As the the one example of the hair on the negative suggests, other explanations exist that are more plausible. I am currently working through Hamisg Lindsay's "Tracking Apollo to the Moon." He tells of a time when the Australian switchboards lit up with calls from people reporting UFOs flying around Canberra. It ended up that the lights moving back and forth came from the plane flying back and forth to conduct the first night test of the facility at Honeysuckle Creek.

posted 11-20-2002 09:43 PM               

But on a more serious note, It would be interesting to find out that something yet undiscovered was actually going on there.

posted 11-21-2002 03:31 AM            

WAWalsh - It wasn't the astronauts, but their instruments left on the lunar surface of Apollo 12 & 14 which detected the geysers. The water cloud covered an area of more than 10 square miles on the eastern edge of The Ocean of Storms.

An interesting article released by NASA was the experiences of Apollo 10. Again UPI on May 22, 1969, stated: Orbiting at only 69 miles above the moon, astronaut Stafford spotted 2 volcanoes. One of them was white on the outside, and black on the top. They also reported seeing many different colors on the moons backside, while the centers of some of the craters glow. “They just glow in the lunar night,” stated astronaut Cernan.

In the February issue of National Geographic Magazine, full reports of the experiences of Apollo 15 were presented. On page 245 it states that the moon has a magnetic field and it does have an atmosphere, although an exceedingly thin one. Apollo 12 & 14 instruments reported lunar quakes and water vapor. (Apollo Superthermal Ion Detectors).

On page 250 it was reported that A15 astros observed a series of small volcanic cones producing evidence of gases coming from the moons interior. This particular sighting was made in the Littrow crater.

On page 252, it states that the astros reported unexplained haze clouds and color flashes in and around the crater Aritarchus.

There really is a lot of documented information about lunar quakes, geysers, haze clouds and flashes of light.

It's all very interesting. The more you find out, the more questions that arise.

posted 11-21-2002 07:54 AM               

On your other points, astronauts were trained, but they are far from geological experts (with the notable exception of Jack Schmitt). Perhaps most of these quesitons would be dismissed if we had sent more scientists to the Moon.

I would suggest, for sake of a scholarly discussion, that you limit your sources to peer review publications, i.e. Science, Nature, etc. These publications will not print an article or study until other scientists in the field verify the science presented within.

posted 11-21-2002 01:34 PM            

The information they presented came from NASA.

It wasn't the source I was looking for, I thought it was a place to go to get some additional insight.

Seismic equipment was placed on the moon for a reason, and they have recorded 'moon quakes'.

I spoke with a number of people who have access to archived Apollo images, getting back to the other issue of 'missing photos' and apparently, according to some of the old timers, some images were never shown to the public. They were not 'relevant'. ie Camera went off by mistake, perhaps a couple of naked astros shot by other crew members, other images grossly out of focus...etc.

No one that I was able to reach was able to confirm or deny any classified images existed.

Having said that, I am happy to end this thread, and I'll limit my posts to much less controversial topics in the future.

Aloha,

posted 11-21-2002 02:19 PM               

Citing articles that are 30-40 years old, while certainly a data point, really don't move the conversation forward either. I can show you articles from that same time period that cite countless scientific errors -- not because the author or publication was faulty but because our understanding has changed since.

posted 11-21-2002 05:18 PM            

I’m not quite sure that a recently published scientific study about quakes and geysers on the moon exists. Surely the folks at NASA who are in charge of recording data of the seismic activity, (if in fact the equipment left up there is still operational), would be aware of any and all activity.