It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

strange formations near the Apollo 16 landing site?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 11:28 AM
link   
I have found the following images while scanning over the Apollo 16 landing site and the near area, you need to look real close to the screen to see the strange formations, the images are from Google mars so its in low res. but still interesting to look at.














Found on google moon at 8°58′22.84″S 15°30′0.68″E
Image below from AS16-P-4095

I also found a similar thing on AS16-P-4095 so i downloaded the 6 GB image for better quality.

from the 6GB image
edit on 13-7-2014 by jamie6737 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-7-2014 by jamie6737 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: jamie6737

Looks like cruft on the scanner. Remember, much of Google Moon uses scanned analogue photos.

Take a look at the LRO mapping for a better view.



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: jamie6737

That almost looks like a hair or a small lifeform under a microscope. Or in this case, a macroscope
.



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Maybe?
edit on 13-7-2014 by jamie6737 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Aleister

The last image and the next to the last image show definite shadows in keeping with the shadows of the terrain. That makes it unlikely that they are copying artifacts. --Not that I claim that they are intelligently created structures, etc.



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Don't bother with blurry low-res pics in Google Moon.

If you want to see the moon in glorious close-up, this is the link you want:

target.lroc.asu.edu...

This has resolution down to 50cm per pixel in many places.

Are you sure your co-ordinates are right? Because I just zoomed in to that spot on Google Moon and I can't see the features you see.




Edit, OK, found the "hair", centred at about 9º 13' 00" S, 15º 43' 30" E.
edit on 13-7-2014 by Rob48 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Rob48

when at 8°58′22.84″S 15°30′0.68″E you can zoom out to see the area in high quality, thats the area i looked over, all of it but you can see the Placemarks so you could try to find them on your PC.


edit on 13-7-2014 by jamie6737 because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-7-2014 by jamie6737 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 12:05 PM
link   
We're making aliens out of pubes now?



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 12:38 PM
link   
As Rob has mentioned, these are scanned pictures, I think one was a blonde and another was brunette.



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 12:43 PM
link   
GIF comparing Google Moon image (with hair) with LRO imagery (without hair).




posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 12:56 PM
link   
Can i change the thread about something else?
edit on 13-7-2014 by jamie6737 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Isnt that the tracks from the rover?

2



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Biigs
Isnt that the tracks from the rover?

No, these are the tracks.



lroc.sese.asu.edu...



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: Aleister

The last image and the next to the last image show definite shadows in keeping with the shadows of the terrain. That makes it unlikely that they are copying artifacts. --Not that I claim that they are intelligently created structures, etc.


If the hair/fiber was generally translucent, then the dark and light portions of the actual image may show throw the hair.



posted on Jul, 13 2014 @ 05:49 PM
link   
Ive just been on AS16-M-0440_LRG and i have found the hair on the original image.

I also found a tower but i lost it when the images crashed. i will report back with it.




posted on Jul, 14 2014 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: jamie6737

simple explanation -

rolling rocks...

At least that's what NASA says about the same features on Mars.



posted on Jul, 14 2014 @ 01:03 AM
link   
a reply to: jamie6737
Of course the fluff will be on those images. Google doesn't scan the images itself, it just uses the scanned copies from NASA. If there's a hair on the NASA scan then it will be copied onto Google Moon.

There is no mile-long snake on the moon.



posted on Jul, 14 2014 @ 01:17 AM
link   
a reply to: jamie6737

If it's a real feature then it should also be on the preceding and following images, but it isn't!



posted on Jul, 19 2014 @ 06:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Rob48

This thread is off by a hair.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join