China, known corporately for it's ability to capitalize on Western innovation by copying branded items very accurately and flooding the market with cheap knock offs, may have done the same with it's space agency branding. Bret Colin Sheppard, Anomaly Hunter, author, and independent space agency photography analyst may have busted China's knock-off version of a map of the Moon.
Sheppard states, "I have noticed something very shocking about our Lunar maps, comparing the Naval US Clementine mission map with the Chinese Chang'e 2 maps. I noticed that they were very similar, in fact, too similar to ignore. Though it is officially stated that the mission images are taken at different altitudes and under different lighting conditions, twelve years apart, the maps match perfectly, even where the dividing line is, on the edges. One very important thing to pay attention to is the angle of the sunlight on surface craters also being exactly the same. The Moon has a synodic cycle of about 29 days, approximately, the presentation of the moon facing towards us alters, day-by-day as the angle of the sun changes, reflecting on the lunar surface. As the lighting should not match up so exactly from two different lunar missions, are we looking at one map as the digitally altered version of another?"
A very good example of the similarities between the Chang´e 2 map and the Clementine map,
Not even the angle of light have changed during the years between the 2 maps. !
The Chinese do not have their own Lunar map they borrowed the clementine map and did some additive pixels and textures to make it look different. It is impossible to run the same course and have the same altitude and lighting not to mention angle and speed and come out with the same exact map.
I can look past the less detail lower res part but exactly the same angle and lighting is impossible.
if it was different it would have different shadows in all the craters and no matter what spot we compare too, the lighting and angle is identical.
What this means is the Chinese don't really have a space program. The deeper meaning is that everything put out to the public was half truths and simulations of our lunar surface.
We deserve the truth our families over generations have shelled out a lot of taxes for these programs.
Bret Sheppard further points out the impossibility of a match so perfectly if these missions were twelve years apart and photos taken at a different time of the year at launch. Are we to believe that the Chinese targeted their probe to match the exact trajectory of the 12-year earlier Clementine mission? Did they really perfecly match that 29.5-day lunar cycle of light effects from the phases of the moon caused by the position of the sun? That seems unlikely due the massive complexity of launching missions from the Earth to the Moon. The mission that resulted in the Clementine map was reported launched in January 25th, 1994. The mission resulting in the Chang'e 2 map was reported launch in October 1st, 2010. That has the missions also launching in a different times of the year, as well, mis-matched one from the other in the elliptical orbit of the moon around the earth.This means we are asked to believe that one orbiter had to fly a different length of time to reach the moon and somehow, and when it got there slow down or speed up to align with the original orbit of the previous mission. Why would that be necessary? A different orbit would have been more interesting, revealing new things in different lighting, formerly dark sides of rims of craters being lit up, for example, than repeating the same angles and trajectories of the original US mission.
Bret Sheppard further points out the impossibility of a match so perfectly if these missions were twelve years apart and photos taken at a different time of the year at launch. Are we to believe that the Chinese targeted their probe to match the exact trajectory of the 12-year earlier Clementine mission? Did they really perfecly match that 29.5-day lunar cycle of light effects from the phases of the moon caused by the position of the sun? That seems unlikely due the massive complexity of launching missions from the Earth to the Moon. The mission that resulted in the Clementine map was reported launched in January 25th, 1994. The mission resulting in the Chang'e 2 map was reported launch in October 1st, 2010. That has the missions also launching in a different times of the year, as well, mis-matched one from the other in the elliptical orbit of the moon around the earth.
This means we are asked to believe that one orbiter had to fly a different length of time to reach the moon and somehow, and when it got there slow down or speed up to align with the original orbit of the previous mission. Why would that be necessary? A different orbit would have been more interesting, revealing new things in different lighting, formerly dark sides of rims of craters being lit up, for example, than repeating the same angles and trajectories of the original US mission.
On both maps, the overall image and the detail pictures also identical in certain aspects. Both complete maps cut off at the exact same longitude meridian line. Nearly all the detail pictures are exactly the same lighting, orientation, and major features with digital enhancements. There are some differences, some changes made so the claim could be made that the latter mission was an update of the former mission. Direct comparison with images shows them to be exactly the same pixel width and height, details changed with photoshop-type effects like moving small craters around, making splashier highlights, such as bright spots that obscure surface details.
Sheppard goes on, "It is impossible to have these striking similarities if, in fact, the lighting and altitude were different. It is my strong opinion that the Chinese Change 2 map is a copy of the Clementine Naval map with only artistic digitally enhanced differences. NASA insider whistleblowers have accused NASA of altering images to sanitize them for the public, creating a public relations brand." He surmises, based on recent whistleblower revelations, that space agencies, American and Chinese has been more concerned with selling these programs to the public, attaining public money and resources than letting the public know what they actually discovered on the moon. A recent picture has been released was found years ago in a garbage can on the way to an incinerator at NASA. The image was from the Apollo 12 mission and was recovered by a NASA insider who thought it was important that historical imagery of the moon missions be preserved. Check out the article here... https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3Ut5V8JVvTxcjVwdzBmZUxybVU ... The high-resolution versions of this photo are here... https://onedrive.live.com/?cid=7b0df2afa2aa9c29&id=7B0DF2AFA2AA9C29%21353
The LRO Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter, touted as an "upgrade" to the original Lunar Orbiter mission to find landing spots for Apollo missions has drawn the attention of anomalists and researchers for the same observations as the Clementine/Chang'e 2 similarities. NASA has only released low-resolution, black-and-white, monoscopic stills of the Lunar Orbiter missions, rather than what is believed to be high resolution, color, stereoscopic, video versions that were the originals. Stacks and stacks of canisters of historical film of the
Lunar Orbiter missions are held in an abandoned
McDonalds on a military base where an organization called the LOIRP, the Lunar Orbiter Image Recovery Project puts out "enhanced" versions of the lunar images. Interestingly, members of the LOIRP approached anomaly groups asking anomalists and researchers to send in their discoveries of anomalies in Lunar Orbiter photographs. If they are happy with their "enhancements" why do they want to know if anyone found anomalies in the originals?
Sheppard states, "I would say this entire space agency propaganda machine of manipulated images was a conn job for funding. We don't even need a space program if they are going to lie to us this way. The funds would be better spent helping the people. Does this means that the Chinese don't really have a public space program, or the US either? Or do they have some missions for show and others are manufactured via imagery? The deeper meaning is that everything put out to the public has been half-truths and simulations of our lunar surface. We deserve the truth. Our families over generations have shelled out a lot of taxes for these programs. Now that our country is in such financial trouble, this is a very serious issue when NASA again asks for so much public money and produces very little to show for it, unless something else is going on."
"I feel that what we are looking at is a secret space program, not a public one. This could be because what they really found out there would disrupt our belief systems and what our leaders consider continuity of government already in place. These representations of reality in space were forced on the public but are quickly becoming archaic as more information is becoming available to the public from unofficial sources. The entire planet should advance and become part of a natural galactic community. Secrecy is most certainly against nature. Whatever the reasons our leaders chose to artificially deny everyone access to information and technology, these reasons are not valid and only serve the few who believe they are supreme over the rest of the population."
"Our space agencies were founded by a 'dictators mentality' for which they feel they need to fully control public perception. The Lunar Lie is a complexity with many separate facts to separate us, but a lie is still just a lie. We are not being told the truth, and that is reason enough not to trust anything the space agencies come out with. Their credibility is non existent as a result of repetitive lies. The truth is that the public has not seen the moon's surface unedited because whatever they found there is of great benefit to the elitists, either in technology or resources which are not shared with this world, or something so horrible that they feel they are protecting the world. The truth is NASA manipulates our public images like they are playing some kind of mind game with the public or just experimenting on our perception, whatever the case, it is unrealistic to lie to a world that wants to grow both spiritually and technically.
Comentários