Picard is a 23-km diameter crater in Mare Crisium (Sea of Crises) on the Moon. Writing Ancient Aliens on the Moon, college drop-out Mike Bara considered Mare Crisium so important that he devoted the whole of Chapter 5 to it.
Mare Crisium has been the site of numerous historical
reports of TLP (transient lunar phenomena), and also the sensational
(and utterly mistaken) 1953 report by journalist John O'Neill of an
artificial bridge over part of the mare1,2. It's also the site of the
so-called "spire," which may well be yet another scanner fault. It
certainly isn't, as both Bara and Hoagland have written, part of a box
several miles high. Even those satellite dishes, that I blogged about on
October 12th, are right around here.
But back to Picard. Mike Bara shows us this picture, a small detail from AS16-121-19438:
[Image]
caption: High contrast version of crater Picard from AS16-121-19438
That image was taken after Apollo 16's LM, Orion, had returned
to orbit following three highly fruitful moonwalks. It's a really wide
angle, showing fully a third of the lunar hemisphere. Bara writes
(p.103):
This unmistakable pie-slice shaped structure glows in the sunlight,
illuminating what must be the last remaining piece of a solid,
watch-crystal like dome over the crater itself.Under intense
enhancement, the wedge-shaped piece is even more obvious. (emphasis
added)
That "what must be" is a strong contender for "most unscientific
statement written this century." As with the satellite dishes, it's a
profound mystery why Mike Bara chose this extremely poor image of
Picard, when an image at approximately 0.8m resolution is so easily
available from Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (14.6°N, 54.7°E). Here it
is:
========================================
1. See Bulletin of the Astronomical Institutes of Czechoslovakia, vol. 8, p.33
2. O'Neill's Bridge (wikispaces)
1 – 43 of 43
Trekker said...
I don't see how Mike can use the 'sun at the wrong angle excuse'
for not using the LROC images. If there truly was a 'pie-slice shaped'
(whatever that is) glass dome fragment over Picard, the edges would
easily be visible in this overhead view, as well as the shadow it would
cast on the ground below, not to mention a reflection from the sun.
It's same as you pointed out in a
previous thread, Paddycakes, the original face on Mars had what, 5
meters of resolution, is it? So the face on Mars is actually a squished
together image of the desert which is actually spread out a lot more
than what's depicted, right?
Or would film used during Apollo, not be subject to that same sort of spacial distortion?
The
original, Viking orbiter, image was 250m/pixel. Really, really crude.
The Ektachrome film used for Apollo was very fine grained, but there
were a variety of lenses provided and the Apollo 16 shot was the
shortest focal length they had, meaning the widest angle possible. Hence
it was useless for seeing detail in them thar craters. Mike Bara
doesn't understand that.
October 19, 2012 8:51 PM
Trekker said...
Viking orbiter? Didn't Viking go to Mars, not the moon?
Those specs help, but I sort of wonder if the resolution of film
with grain doesn't provide more information than the space between the
pixels of digital imaging?
I recently watched a trailer for the anniversary theatrical
release of a directors cut of the God Father. That vintage movie was
not made for the larger projection lenses and screens of this more
modern era. At such high magnification, the grain is intolerable. Of
course it was film bumped to digital, but pixelation was not
contributing to the distortion at all. The grain was simply gigantic.
October 20, 2012 4:03 PM
Anonymous said...
Why are Mike and Hoagy so hung up on glass domes. Given that their pictures show nothing but their own imaginations, why domes?
Would not oh... pyramids fit better with their mythos?
-James
October 20, 2012 8:26 PM
James Concannon said...
I wonder what Mike means when he writes "enhancement"? The
so-called enhanced image of Picard in his Picasa gallery just looks a
bit more contrasty. In terms of interpreting what it shows, I'd say he's
degraded it rather than enhanced it. Perhaps that's deliberate.
James, The whole "we can add information by 'enhancing' the
image" idea is completely bogus anyway. If it's not in the original
image, it's not there. You can't make it appear by applying Photoshop
magic.
Why was NASA wrong about the show that bombed when the bunker
buster they dropped where Hoagland says there are domes, didn't produce
the predicted cloud of rising dust?
No, NASA said that there would be a big dust plume that would
show up brightly illuminated by the Sun. They got everybody to stare at
the Moon and we didn't see shit. Why didn't we?
August
11, 2008: There are places on the Moon where the sun hasn't shined for
millions of years. Dark polar craters too deep for sunlight to penetrate
are luna incognita, the realm of the unknown, and in their inky depths,
researchers believe, may lie a treasure of great value.
NASA is about to light one up.
Sometime
between May and August 2009, depending on launch dates, the booster
stage for NASA's LCROSS probe will deliberately crash into a
permanently-shadowed lunar crater at 9,000 km/hr, producing an explosion
equivalent to about 2,000 pounds of TNT (6.5 billion joules). The blast
will jettison material out of the crater into broad daylight where
astronomers can search the debris for signs of lunar water.
Politics June 19, 2009 By: Alfred Lambremont Webre
Commentary:
The planned October 9, 2009 bombing of the moon by a NASA orbiter that
will bomb the moon with a 2-ton kinetic weapon to create a 5 mile wide
deep crater as an alleged water-seeking and lunar colonization
experiment, is contrary to space law prohibiting environmental
modification of celestial bodies. The NASA moon bombing, a component of
the LCROSS mission, may also trigger conflict with known
extraterrestrial civilizations on the moon as reported on the moon in
witnessed statements by U.S. astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong,
and in witnessed statements to NSA (National Security Agency) photos and
documents regarding an extraterrestrial base on the dark side of the
moon.
If the true intent of the LCROSS mission moon bombing is a
hostile act by NASA against known extraterrestrial civilizations and
settlements on the moon, then NASA and by extension the U.S. government
are guilty of aggressive war which is the most serious of war crimes
under the U.N. Charter and the Geneva Conventions, to which the U.S. is
subject. The U.N. Outer Space Treaty, which the U.S. has ratified,
requires that “ The moon and other celestial bodies shall be used by all
States Parties to the Treaty exclusively for peaceful purposes. The
establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the
testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military manoeuvres on
celestial bodies shall be forbidden.” 98 nations have ratified and 125
nations have signed the U.N. Outer Space Treaty.
Alfred Lambremont Webre is a lawyer, not a scientist.
There
are no statements by U.S. astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong
regarding an extraterrestrial base on the dark side of the moon, unless
you count statements along the lines of "No, we didn't see that."
LCROSS was not a weapon.
I don't know why the impact plume was less than expected. Phil Plait's blog may have something on that.
October 22, 2012 6:31 AM
Strahlungsamt said...
@Trekker
Don't be so sure. Remember Alderaan?
October 22, 2012 11:19 AM
Trekker said...
Sorry, remind me. Who or what is Alderaan?
October 22, 2012 11:21 AM
Strahlungsamt said...
I just loooove the whole conspiracy mindset. Better to believe
some celebrity gossip site than a NASA report (because celebrity
journalists are always right and NASA covers up everything in case we
might turn into brain-eating zombies and re-elect Obama or something).
BTW,
have you guys seen Iron Sky yet? I just did and it's hilarious. It
literally rips open every space-based conspiracy and just gets nuttier
and nuttier as it goes along. Basically, the descendants of the original
Nazis escaped to the Moon, built a base and taught their kids that once
all humans are Aryanized, there will be world peace. The first man on
the moon in 50 years is black, Sarah Palin is president and there's
references to Dr. Strangelove and there's a 1138 in there somewhere. If
you've ever listened to a conspiracy rant, that's what the story is
like. Loads of inconsistent to impossible events took place to make
improbable things happen and, of course, it's all true. If Hoagie and
Mike were good storytellers, they could almost have written it
themselves. Best bit, the movie makes fun of conspiracies too much
for Hoagie and Mike to use it for clues. Guess they'll have to stick
with "Mission to Mars" for now.
Hoagland says that the reason that there was no dust plume, was
because the domes are sooooo big, that the hole that the bunker buster
put in one, was not big enough for the dust to get out. I haven't heard
any explanation from NASA at all. That's what I mean about NASA. They
never give you all the information. Is it any wonder that people get
all conspiratorial? NASA need to become much more accountable, because
tax payers are fed up with paying their money and taking it in the butt.
October 22, 2012 2:08 PM
Trekker said...
Misti, a two-second google search provided me with NASA's explanation, dating from Oct. 21, 2010:
Exactly, mistic, NASA has to explain any infatuation that comes
to mind to any nutcase, yes, it would be wellworth its money .... Not
like the U.S. DOD, right? yes ... they do well in explaining in what
democratic things spends 40% "taxpayers' money" (Don´t you get tired of
that demagogic litany yet?)
Thanks for the link, Strahlungsamt,
that Shakespearean accent of Peter Cushing... (And a little of Carrie
Fisher!!!, ha ha ,ha...) Nice.
Trekkie, you are full of shit. That linked article does not give
NASASS' explanation as to why they made the false claim, that there
would be a dust plume visible from Earth, and why that plume did not
occur.
Even the close up videos don't show a plume. It's a perfect example of the Emperor's New Cloths.
October 22, 2012 4:30 PM
jourget said...
Misti, I think the fact that they originally claimed that a
prominent plume would most likely occur, and then a plume less
conspicuous in the visual spectrum than expected (not NO plume, as you
seem to imply) showed up is a really excellent example of why we do
science. The current models of ice on the lunar south pole said one
thing would happen, then the LCROSS results said something was a little
off. The conclusion to be drawn from these quotes is that we learned
something we didn't know before. Before the fact statements that end up
being incorrect and non-credentialed folks who said something on the
internet once do not compelling evidence of a conspiracy make.
NASA publicized a great big plume that was supposed to be visible
from Earth, and it wasn't even visible in video. NASA offered no
explanation as to what happened to the plume. It's just like Hoagland
announcing his birthday wish for loot so he could go to Egypt. Instead,
he gypped everybody and went to his local bar and celebrated his
birthday there. He hasn't said a word about that, either.
I want my money back from NASA. At least I had sense enough after that fiasco then to give any money to Hoagland.
October 22, 2012 5:03 PM
jourget said...
Not only wasn't the plume visible on video, it wasn't visible in
even the highest-powered Earth telescopes looking for it. Still doesn't
mean anything. NASA isn't a Hollywood studio promising a whiz-bang
blockbuster and then failing to deliver. They do science. If they could
have said with 100% accuracy what they would see before they launched
the mission, then there would have been no need for the mission. They
didn't say why they got those results immediately afterward because,
with real scientists, incorporating new results takes time. You're right
about the advantages about a balanced critique, but absolutely wrong
about Hoagland and NASA being exactly alike.
Really? I'm still waiting for NASA to make a retraction about
that arsenic eating bacteria. NASA delays a press conference to
coincide with the return of the nine month absence of the nuclear
powered, Project Prometheus, X-37B, which Hoagland also ignored, makes a
big bogus announcement of new, alien forms of life, and then never owns
up to having lied yet again.
NASA delays the press conference to steal the headlines about the
unexplained mission of the X-37B. The Air-force claimed that it had
simply disappeared. All the public's attention was on NASA claiming
alien life now astronomically much more feasible with the discovery of
the arsenic eating bacteria. Richard C Hoagland goes on Coast to Coast
AM in support of NASASS' claims, while also making no mention, even in
passing, about the X-37B. George Noory's first interview with Hoagland
was an entire show about Project Prometheus, the nuclear powered
Spacecraft. The next day after the press conference, Hoagland nuked all
referecne from his facebutt page, about the X-37B and Project
Prometheus. NASA held that televised press conference, not only to
divert from the secret mission of the nuclear powered Project
Prometheus, X-37B, but also to reach the largest possible audience. How
many people today, are still under the impression that alien life has
been announced by NASA, despite the small articles that subsequently
smashed the faulty science to smithereens? There is no arsenic eating
bacteria.
Now that NASA says that a "plastic containment" of an
uncertain origin was discovered by Curiosity. What ever happened to
all of those dispersing Mars probes? Did they crash on the surface of
the planet, did the Martians shoot them down, or did the X-37B already
go and retrieve them all?
NASA has deliberately muddied the water. By announcing
feasibility of alien life, irrespective of the fact that the science was
bogus, everybody thinks that it's true. By finding plastic on the
surface of Mars, if bacteria ever is discovered, there is no way to say
that it wasn't introduced by the clumsiness of NASA; plastic can't be
sterilized. There is no way for anybody to know anything for certain,
one way or another. The one true thing that Hoagland often says, is:
"The lie is different at every level."
Now, if bacteria is announced to have been discovered on Mars,
and NASA is to say that it can't be sure if they didn't put it there
themselves, people will jump to the conclusion that NASA is being overly
conservative, or trying to cover up alien life. After all, even if a
silicone based bacteria were to be found on Mars, NASA already will be
remembered to have already discovered it in the Salton Sea in the low
valley of the Southern California desert.
"Mike Bara sees glass over Picard"
43 Comments - Hide Original Post
Mare Crisium has been the site of numerous historical reports of TLP (transient lunar phenomena), and also the sensational (and utterly mistaken) 1953 report by journalist John O'Neill of an artificial bridge over part of the mare1,2. It's also the site of the so-called "spire," which may well be yet another scanner fault. It certainly isn't, as both Bara and Hoagland have written, part of a box several miles high. Even those satellite dishes, that I blogged about on October 12th, are right around here.
But back to Picard. Mike Bara shows us this picture, a small detail from AS16-121-19438:
[Image] caption: High contrast version of crater Picard from AS16-121-19438 That image was taken after Apollo 16's LM, Orion, had returned to orbit following three highly fruitful moonwalks. It's a really wide angle, showing fully a third of the lunar hemisphere. Bara writes (p.103):
This unmistakable pie-slice shaped structure glows in the sunlight, illuminating what must be the last remaining piece of a solid, watch-crystal like dome over the crater itself.Under intense enhancement, the wedge-shaped piece is even more obvious. (emphasis added)
That "what must be" is a strong contender for "most unscientific statement written this century." As with the satellite dishes, it's a profound mystery why Mike Bara chose this extremely poor image of Picard, when an image at approximately 0.8m resolution is so easily available from Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (14.6°N, 54.7°E). Here it is:
[Image] photo credit: LROC NAC
Where's that pie-slice now, Bara? Eh?? EH?????
========================================
1. See Bulletin of the Astronomical Institutes of Czechoslovakia, vol. 8, p.33
2. O'Neill's Bridge (wikispaces)
It's same as you pointed out in a previous thread, Paddycakes, the original face on Mars had what, 5 meters of resolution, is it? So the face on Mars is actually a squished together image of the desert which is actually spread out a lot more than what's depicted, right?
Or would film used during Apollo, not be subject to that same sort of spacial distortion?
The original, Viking orbiter, image was 250m/pixel. Really, really crude. The Ektachrome film used for Apollo was very fine grained, but there were a variety of lenses provided and the Apollo 16 shot was the shortest focal length they had, meaning the widest angle possible. Hence it was useless for seeing detail in them thar craters. Mike Bara doesn't understand that.
Command Module: 80mm f/2.8, 250mm
Lunar Module: 60mm, 500mm
ref: Press Kit,, p.123
180d/πf
where d =width of film (70mm for Apollo)
f=focal length of lens
So for the 60mm lens, angle is 67° -- pretty wide.
Would not oh... pyramids fit better with their mythos?
-James
The whole "we can add information by 'enhancing' the image" idea is completely bogus anyway. If it's not in the original image, it's not there. You can't make it appear by applying Photoshop magic.
Here's a press release:
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/releases/2010/10-89AR.html
Here's the wikipage:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCROSS
A Flash of Insight: LCROSS Mission Update
August 11, 2008: There are places on the Moon where the sun hasn't shined for millions of years. Dark polar craters too deep for sunlight to penetrate are luna incognita, the realm of the unknown, and in their inky depths, researchers believe, may lie a treasure of great value.
NASA is about to light one up.
Sometime between May and August 2009, depending on launch dates, the booster stage for NASA's LCROSS probe will deliberately crash into a permanently-shadowed lunar crater at 9,000 km/hr, producing an explosion equivalent to about 2,000 pounds of TNT (6.5 billion joules). The blast will jettison material out of the crater into broad daylight where astronomers can search the debris for signs of lunar water.
NASA moon bombing violates space law & may cause conflict with lunar ET/UFO civilizations
Politics
June 19, 2009
By: Alfred Lambremont Webre
Commentary: The planned October 9, 2009 bombing of the moon by a NASA orbiter that will bomb the moon with a 2-ton kinetic weapon to create a 5 mile wide deep crater as an alleged water-seeking and lunar colonization experiment, is contrary to space law prohibiting environmental modification of celestial bodies. The NASA moon bombing, a component of the LCROSS mission, may also trigger conflict with known extraterrestrial civilizations on the moon as reported on the moon in witnessed statements by U.S. astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong, and in witnessed statements to NSA (National Security Agency) photos and documents regarding an extraterrestrial base on the dark side of the moon.
If the true intent of the LCROSS mission moon bombing is a hostile act by NASA against known extraterrestrial civilizations and settlements on the moon, then NASA and by extension the U.S. government are guilty of aggressive war which is the most serious of war crimes under the U.N. Charter and the Geneva Conventions, to which the U.S. is subject. The U.N. Outer Space Treaty, which the U.S. has ratified, requires that “ The moon and other celestial bodies shall be used by all States Parties to the Treaty exclusively for peaceful purposes. The establishment of military bases, installations and fortifications, the testing of any type of weapons and the conduct of military manoeuvres on celestial bodies shall be forbidden.” 98 nations have ratified and 125 nations have signed the U.N. Outer Space Treaty.
[continues]
http://www.examiner.com/article/nasa-moon-bombing-violates-space-law-may-cause-conflict-with-lunar-et-ufo-civilizations
There are no statements by U.S. astronauts Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong regarding an extraterrestrial base on the dark side of the moon, unless you count statements along the lines of "No, we didn't see that."
LCROSS was not a weapon.
I don't know why the impact plume was less than expected. Phil Plait's blog may have something on that.
Don't be so sure. Remember Alderaan?
BTW, have you guys seen Iron Sky yet? I just did and it's hilarious. It literally rips open every space-based conspiracy and just gets nuttier and nuttier as it goes along. Basically, the descendants of the original Nazis escaped to the Moon, built a base and taught their kids that once all humans are Aryanized, there will be world peace. The first man on the moon in 50 years is black, Sarah Palin is president and there's references to Dr. Strangelove and there's a 1138 in there somewhere.
If you've ever listened to a conspiracy rant, that's what the story is like. Loads of inconsistent to impossible events took place to make improbable things happen and, of course, it's all true. If Hoagie and Mike were good storytellers, they could almost have written it themselves.
Best bit, the movie makes fun of conspiracies too much for Hoagie and Mike to use it for clues. Guess they'll have to stick with "Mission to Mars" for now.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBAZGtBfcY4
http://lcross.arc.nasa.gov/observation.htm
Thanks for the link, Strahlungsamt, that Shakespearean accent of Peter Cushing... (And a little of Carrie Fisher!!!, ha ha ,ha...) Nice.
Now that NASA says that a "plastic containment" of an uncertain origin was discovered by Curiosity. What ever happened to all of those dispersing Mars probes? Did they crash on the surface of the planet, did the Martians shoot them down, or did the X-37B already go and retrieve them all?