MoonFaker: LRO at 25km, Dead Ends & No Fly Zones. PART 1

By far the one of the most overwhelming anomalies to be found in the LRO photographs are the Apollo 15 rover tracks. Although appearing so prominent in the area surrounding the alleged lunar module, the trails from station to station are a different story. They gradually start to fade before disappearing altogether, as though the Photoshop editor drawing them in never finished his work.
http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc_browse/view/M111578606LE

Although no large raw tiff files of the 25km images have been released, ASU released a video of the Apollo 17 site showing a much wider area than what was supplied in the downloads. After analyzing the video, it becomes apparent the Apollo 17 image has the same flaw as the Apollo 15 image: rover tracks immediately disappearing outside the boarder of what was published.
http://wms.lroc.asu.edu/lroc_browse/view/M168000580R
http://lroc.sese.asu.edu/DOWNLOADS/LROC_Explores_Apollo17.mov
http://www.nasa.gov/mov/584427main_LROC_Explores_Apollo17.mov

Since the released of the 25km images, NASA has declared the Apollo sites to be "no fly zones"! Gee, I wonder why.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• MoonFaker
• LRO
• at
• 25km
• Dead
• Ends
• and
• No
• Fly
• Zones
• Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter
• NASA
• fake
• moon
• landing
• hoax
• conspiracy
• theory
• 25cm/pixel
• Apollo
• 12
• 14
• 17
• GeoEye-1
• Lunar
• Reconaissance
• Orbiter
• ASU
• LROC
• Jarrah
• White
• JW
• Studios

[ZapruderJr]

Ok, this is troubling stuff. I don't know what to think, so I'll just ask directly - If there's no deception going on here, does anybody have a sensible, logical reason why the tracks would just fade off and disappear immediately past the borders of that published image?

I'm not really on either side of this thing and I seriously don't know who is right on this, but I want to know. I'm not interested in what may or may not happen in the future, side issues, derogatory terms or other BS.

[straydog02]

@HeadLikeARock .. It should be interesting to see what happens, if or when the Chinese have the ability to properly image the Apollo sites.. They will then have the choice to either help NASA continue their Apollo cover-up, or they can expose their fraud to the world.

Considering the FACT that so many major US corporations outsource millions of jobs to China, I'm thinkin they will help the US continue the cover-up.

[straydog02]

@HeadLikeARock ..The reason for LRO mission might not have been to image the Apollo sites but it would have only been a nice bonus for NASA if the pics actually proved the Apollo debris was where NASA claims it is. Unfortunately, the pics only prove that NASA's photo fakers did a lously job using photoshop.

It's not only possible for NASA to hide whatever they please but they continue to do so. No matter what anyone's take is on their no fly zones, it has only made Apollo more suspect.

[straydog02]

@HeadLikeARock .. Ok, the "tracks" continue on SLIGHTLY after the cropped images. The point is they disappear after that. There is no reason they would be easily visible only at the immediate "landing" sites but disappear slightly after the cropped images of the sites.

I suspect the Rover tracks are only visible around the LM because NASA didn't think that many people would look beyond their cropped images.

Do you have any links to the statiions where you claim astro activity can be seen?

[HeadLikeARock]

@straydog02 It's acceptable because LRO mission is not to prove the authenticity of Apollo! Any pictures of Apollo is a nice bonus.

It's impossible for NASA to hide anything, since any nation or organisation with the ability and desire can image the Apollo sites at whatever resolution they want to pay for, regardless of anyone's take on the 'no fly' zone. What a great coup for the Chinese if they could image the sites and PROVE there was no landings! Wonder why they don't?

[HeadLikeARock]

@straydog02 The tracks don't vanish immediately beyond the cropped image, they continue on slightly. And as JW himself has shown, in some places you can just make out faint rover tracks away from the main sites.

You can also see evidence of astronaut activity at many of the geology stations remote from the main sites, for example A17, station 2 and 6. I suspect that rover tracks are more visible near the LM due to higher contrast with the scoured dust blooms visible at each landing site.

[straydog02]

@HeadLikeARock .. If you've really looked at the LRO evidence, I don't know how you could possibly reach a different conclusion to that of Jarrah's. Especially since the Rover "tracks" completely vanish beyond NASA's cropped images of those sites.

NASA presents low definition, photoshopped pics of the Apollo sites, yet for some strange reason you find that perfectly acceptable.

Your state of denial to the fact that NASA is hiding something, and that all is not well with Apollo, is obvious.

[straydog02]

@HeadLikeARock .. It's not worth the bother rehashing the many flaws in your pro Apollo arguments.. The difference between you and me, is that I will admit when I've been proven wrong.. You won't.

[straydog02]

@HeadLikeARock .. Yes, please PM Jarrah and ask him to clarify his position on NASA's no fly zone orders.