http://keithlaney.net/ApolloOrbitalimages/...s10-28-3990.jpg

Something spilled on the film?

Weird at the very least.

Thats a good question,looks like some part of a ship or a piece of sattlelite and I know that I'm wrong.whos to tell what it is it is a good picture anyway guess I'm no help at all.walks away with head low and scatching brow.

Looks like burnt film to me, with all the little bubbles.

Study the object carefully. Look at the shadow(s) at the top.

Looks like the bow section of a star cruiser.

i'm not trying to be sarcastic by the way, it does look interesting, though it's impssible to say whether it may have been added later or what.

Lol, That has to be one of the worst fakes I've ever seen ..

I'm sorry but this looks like it has been altered ( faked), compare how the sunlight reacts on IT and to the moon, it clearly shows IT was added after the photo was taken. Just observe the shadows on the craters, I see IT also has a shadow on the surface of the moon, it clearly demostrates it is faked, see the shadow is to dark compared to the rest of the shadows, brightness and darkness of shadows indicate how much sunlight, and what angle the sunlight is reaching the object, on an object on orbit of the moon the angle would be the same.

Oh for goodness sake

Yes..I agree, the lighting, shadowing and clarity 'seems' all wrong. It definitely looks like a composite picture, so IMO, its a fake

Kraken

Agreeing with AmazingAtheist, one of the worst fakes I've ever seen, as well.

Either that, or like other said, the film had some damage of some sort.

I think this is a fascinating photograph. Because it is a pussle. The "object" looks like a view of a continent. There are many bits and flecks all over the image, and with some analysis it should be possible to find edges and artifacts to show how it comes this brilliant object is in the field of space over a much muted light of the moon. I think it is two different images somehow merged in one. Maybe it is evidence of cropping in the photolab at JPL or where ever NASA does that kind of work. I don't know. It is a vivid picture inside another picture. It doesn't make sense right now. I love it. Very odd. In so saying, I think it will have an explanation from something done in a lab, but as to being a purposely constructed fake, I don't see how that can be concluded from the fact of the image itself. It would help if the provenance was included. Maybe someone will some day find a Landsat photo of earth and see the same outline. I thought it looked like some part of Africa near the Arabian Sea. But I'm not all that good at geography.

The webmaster has a series of Apollo-10 shots linked from http://keithlaney.net/ApolloOrbitalimages/...ital_images.htm

Note that it is 'only' the 'interesting ones' -- NOT the context shots immediately before and after the ones displayed.

Normal photo procedure was to shoot tight sequences with overlap so as to provide perspective and multiple views of areas.

My bet -- since the adjacent images are NOT shown -- they do NOT include this image anomaly.

They are withheld from the website viewers on purpose. Maybe?

Looks like part of a taco...

Although Apollo-10 is so far poorly covered in it, I highly recommend the Apollo journals
project hosted at the NASA History Office but mostly still "under construction" by
volunteers such as Eric Jones. Brouse around it for hours of fascination:
http://history.nasa.gov/alsj/

and the photo archives at
http://www.apolloarchive.com/apollo_gallery.html

very nice looking at, gets my imagination running

If the photo is real maybe a huge rock.

I would like to see the NASA site that this photo was copied from. Which I doubt will happen .... I have no small idea, but this was taken from a NASA or private site and doctored to create hits to the Conspiracy Website it is on. Hits = $$$$ for the owner of the site. Let's be honest ... people will do just about anything for money ... even scams....

By the looks of it, there seems to be a lot of scratches on the shot, the big glitch looks like a tear. Would have to view the negative if available.

Actually, the person behind that website COULD have included the adjacent images and it would have strengthened whatever case may be implied by the photo's inclusion. I researched additional views and found them; anyone, especially you Jim, could have done what I did. However, the adjacent photos are at a more serious website, the Lunar and Planetary Institute. Go to their website and bring up Magazine O, as seen below. Then bring up images 3988 and 3989. They show 2 additional, different views of the same object, seemingly real and in orbit.

Jim, with your NASA association, couldn't you research this and find out for us if this is a legit series of photos or not. If they are legit, there's some explaining to do from NASA. If they have the photos and the photos do not show the object, then I'll be more than glad, using your research as reference, to inform the website owner and the LAPI to remove the photos from their websites. Use your influence.

Lunar and Planetary Institute: <a href="http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/c...0mm/mission/?10" target="_blank">http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/c...0mm/mission/?10</a>
Magazine O AS10-28-3988 to AS10-28-4163 [176 black & white images (0 surface; 176 orbital; 0 other)]

Could this be an unknown orbiting body, a mini-moon? A comet that was captured by the moon without crashing on the surface? But if this turns out to be the case, I'd be surprised since I don't remember ever seeing anything anywhere about such an orbiting body.

Here's something else to consider. The photo in my post is of a high resolution photo. It allows more detail than the photos at the Lunar and Planetary Institute. If the photos at the LAPI were as high in resolution, then we could see if the "shadow" mentioned by another poster is still there and possibly moved due to the object rotating or moving.

So, Jim, find us high resolution photos of frames 3988, 3989 so we can clear that detail. It would help establish a fake or real. Being at the LAPI, and being sequential, I say it's real just on a hunch. I'll accept being wrong also.

Thanks for the original work, Ed -- well done.

As of this morning, I'm getting the following message at the URL you provided:

The page cannot be found.[size="4"][/size]
The page you are looking for may have been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable.

Well, this URL does work:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/c...mm/magazine/?28

..and it tells me its logophagia time ('word eating'). Ed, you score
big on this and you caught me doing something i criticize others for --
imagining a situation, instead of doing enough extra work to determine
the reality. I am well rebuked.

Now, what is it, indeed?


Click to view attachment

I looked at the 3 images in question. The larger image originally posted looks to be a torn bit of curled paper floating out there.

Maybe it has the ANSWER to the age old question of "What is the meaning of life?" LOL

I haven't a clue what this is. It's shown on 3 images and positioned in a slightly different spot for each image. See what I mean HERE.
It is strange how that one link SkepticalEd posted up from Lunar and Planetary Institute is no longer working. I looked at it last night and saved the 3 images on my PC but today the link is giving an error.

Maybe a micrometeorite pinged the exterior, and a fleck drifted in front of the camera.

if you felt suspcious, you could wonder why, after the three frames showing whatever it might be, they abruptly cut to pictures of the moon's surface...

Ok, I just looked at the 3 pictures in question:

When I played w/the contrast on all three it became evident that this is NOT way out over the moon. It looks like it's actually much closer to the camera then not, thus giving the illusion of "bigger".

Here are the pics where I adjusted the contrast and one that overlayed them all in one picture:

3988 -
Click to view attachment

3989 -
Click to view attachment

3990 -
Click to view attachment

All 3 Overlaid: 3988 Bottom, 3989 Middle and 3990 Top:
Click to view attachment

Hope this helps in clearity ... BTW: Thanks for providing the source link. Also it should be pointed out that based on the clearityof these pic's ... well stay tuned.


EDITED:
An interesting observation - Not for lack of looking, so IF I missed it, please show me. I checked for an E-Mail Address to write Keith Laney about the source of the questioned Photograph. I did not see one to write for this information. If someone has that and can show and/or provide it to me. I would very much write him for the Source Site of that photo graph. Reason: It's res. is 2000x2008 x 300 DPI. The NASA source photo is: 450x450 x 72 dpi. Obviously they are NOT the same photo and or if they are --- there has been some serious modifications to it.

I did notice he uses:
Imaging software -When you have to be the best-
ENVI 4.3
Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo XI

Which also you can see from his main page an other photos, he does very much indeed know how to manipulate photos. So having a credible and verifiable source of the photo in question would be good - other wise because of the evidence from his own site, manipulation of the photo is NOT out of the equation.

Oh, lordy, lordy, lordy! I've had it. When I read your comments to her, and then went to see for myself, she blew a gasket! She said he's probably being held in Guantanamo Bay by now, getting his ... reamed! When websites are affected that fast, it shows that these are not the United States we grew up in, etc.

Final comments (for this reply). The photo may have been taken down for reasons unknown since it is a private website.

Perhaps she's right. I gotta back off on supplying anything questionable, staying away from forums such as this one, and just enjoying my retirement. AFTER I put up a website where I take on George Leonard, Fred Steckling, Richard C. Hoagland, Michael Bara, Bruce Cornet, and all of those weirdos who make unfounded claims about alien artifacts/structures on the Moon. I've been meaning to do so since the early '80s and the time is ripe. I've already started and I still got a ways to go. Sort of my "crowning achievement."

If the "slide show" is your creation, nice. Is it possible for you to synchronize the 3 images so that the lunar surface remains steady and one can then see the object moving? That synchronizing technique has been done for UFO videos where the hand is really shaky and the UFO is stabilized for better observance. It was also done for the Phoenix flares where they took daylight video from the same location and focal length of one of the night videos and synchronized the two, stabilizing the images, so that one could see each flare dropping behind a mountain, eliminating the alien b.s.

Hmm now the Lunar and Planetary Institute LINK is working.

SE... I'm no professional on doing that sort of thing and limited with the software I have. Most of which are Freeware that I have found over the years. I just took the images that I had saved from LPI web site, and compiled them in the order of 3988, 3989, 3990 then used Magic Pic 2 Animation (simple small freeware program I found). The small program can create AVI, GIF or SWF. For these 3 pics I chose to create a SWF in 1FPS and uploaded the small file to Image shack.

I know what you mean though - and yes, they did that with the Phoenix lights / flares.. but I have no idea how to do that sort of thing.

Ed, get a grip. The guy was a volunteer for a group of about 500 citizens who helped NASA promote space exploration.

Along the way, he promoted the idea that NASA is lying about its program of space exploration.

NASA seems to have decided that a guy with such public statements would not be in line with their public relations intentions for the program.

So they took his name off the volunteer list.

Jeeez, how is that like Gitmo?

In fact, how is the myth of Gitmo at all like the real Gitmo?

Except maybe how loonies of all stripes shriek and gyrate over things they claim they fear, but things they deep-down inside know aren't worth being afraid of, unless the guys locked up in Gitmo (and their associates) actually get loose and take power -- which they won't because most reality-grounded folks know who should really be feared, fought, and smashed. And acting 'brave' in front of non-threats like the US gummint is a sop to consciences of phonies who are too scared of the real bad guys to ever do anything to get them mad, in prep for the day when they might just win and take revenge of those who stood up, or spoke up, or acted up, for freedom.

Rant mode -- off. Sorry.

This film magazine was from the OP:

Magazine O

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/c...mm/magazine/?28

[176 black & white images (0 surface; 176 orbital; 0 other)]


Some camera/mission related artifacts seem to be in the next one, too. Good grief, Charlie Brown:

Magazine P

http://www.lpi.usra.edu/resources/apollo/c...mm/magazine/?29

[163 black & white images (0 surface; 163 orbital; 0 other)]

item-

AS10-29-4175

It just looks like something messed up the pic before it was developed. Great Pic though.

There is no doubt that Linda is super-paranoid thanks, primarily, to her imagination. I'm not like that. She was serious about my involvement while at the same time having a little fun with that Gitmo thing as a way of putting the dot on the i. And she blew the gasket after I mentioned to her Episode 2, where the photo was removed. We are opposites. She doesn't want to make waves, while I'm in the process of doing so! I tell her that John Lear who made some truly ridiculous claims over at ATS (Above Top Secret) is not being bothered by any authorities for the things that he says, and they are the product of a bizarre mind. A guy so brilliant (I'm assuming) going off the deep end as he sounds as he has. His thread ran for over a year with lunar photos and the illusions he and others saw. So, in a way, I'm having a little fun also. I would have explained sooner or later. But our door is double-locked anyway! :-) (I don't know how to access the emoticons.)

That one does look more like film imperfection or camera malfunction, although a super-expensive Hasselblad should not behave this way. But perhaps the rigor of spaceflight put more strain on the equipment than when used on Earth. By the way, on that website you'll also find frames with UFOs which I posted on an earlier topic. One can spend a lot of time admiring the lunar photographs and I wish that they were larger photos, screen-wide so that one can study the lunar detail. I just acquired a URL for a website that allegedly contains 5,000 lunar photos, some never seen before! I wonder what I'll find there.
item-

.

Oh for Goodness sake....you know how many pics like that there are out there?

looks like a piece of Africa is flying around out there

Ha ha ha! That is probably the WORST example of cut and paste I've ever seen. The moon is all rough around the edges, and the object looks like someone created it digitally. Plus, if this is in space, where are the stars? Whoever made this should at least learn how to use photoshop properly before they make something like this.

http://www.meinews.net/apollo-t75622.html

http://161.115.184.211/teague/apollo/as10-28-3988.jpg

In that thread you can find another image, different from the Keithlaney site.

Interesting.

reverse the questioning here, um... what does NASA say it is? (first pic)

Revealed all is, on another thread:
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...howtopic=110272

To me, the "object" looks like dried dark room chemicals that contaminated this image. If you adjust the levels or brightness you can see a faint edge where it was partialy wiped away as well as other signs of sloppy work. It kind of hard for me to imagine such sloppy work (especialy in nasa) but the grunt developing thousands of these images could have overlooked it in the grind of his job.

How did it end up in three photos? It could have been a dried drip of developing chemicals on the glass plate used to hold the photo-paper or negative during the developing of these images. It would explane why the "object" is allways in about the same location of the print even though the landscape changes between AS10-28-3988 and AS10-28-3989.
It also has the same profile in the three images, unlike what you would expect form a moving/rotating peice of mylar)

A photoshopped photo.

Internal reflections were common during the missions. One famous so called "UFO" one was a moon shot from the LEM. Internal lights reflecting off the window.

I don't think that what this photo shows is an internal reflection(s). It can possibly be explained as due to some other photographic factor. Just now I was browsing at the Apollo 12 Image Library and I found another photo full of the same photographic anomaly and when I tried to find it again to post it here for comparison I couldn't find it.

Epoch!

Click to view attachment

Chocolate Epoch! This morning, close to 2am I had a chocolete-covered ice cream bar. I kept the wrapper nearby in case the ice cream started to drip. When I was finished and started to insert the wooden stick in the wrapper to discard both I noticed some chocolate residue inside the wrapper. Unbelievable as it may seem, I noticed what you see in the photos. How is that for a connecting coincidence?

Obviously a Venusian craft full of venus people...........
OR obviously a floatin rock in space..........

Epoch !........
The world is ending!!!....... ............. unfortunately.

to me, the photo doesnt even look real. Not like somebody edited it, but it just looks like a cartoon picture to me like from a game. And if it is real, then i highly doubt its a UFO, and altho nobody know properly what a UFO looks like, but im pretty sure it wudnt be shaped like a pyarmid with bits missing out of it. So id gues its just a piece of rock myself =D

MERMAIDMAN!!!