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.

 

Odd looking spider like thing on the moon? Excavator?

page: 2
20
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: DigitalJedi805



No self-respecting astronomer takes 10,000 pictures of anything with lint on his lens. Don't buy it.

The image wasn't taken by an astronomer with lint on his lens it was taken in lunar orbit by the Apollo 8 mission , if you had checked the Link I provided you would see that the contamination happens here on Earth when the images are being scanned.

Whether you chose to accept it or not makes no difference the evidence is out there to show that's what it is.

edit on 7-10-2014 by gortex because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe


Would those swirls show up brighter on a picture though? This thing looks 3 dimensional on the surface.

Looks can be deceiving. I though it looked like tracks. Someone else will say its aleen tracks. Hey, maybe they are. Humans aren't from there.

The surface of the moon is undisturbed for many millennia, a coating of some dust can hide a subsurface that is highly contrasted. A vehicle that starts at a central point and traces outward and back again along the same path would explain that. There is only one vehicle I know that went to the moon.

I said that I know of. Cause I don't really know. We both said "looks like".
edit on 7-10-2014 by intrptr because: bb code



posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: DigitalJedi805

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: Ridhya




Maybe even some failed human attempt to mine on the moon?

Technically it's on the Moon but in reality it's on the image of the Moon , there are many examples of bits of lint or dust caught on Moon images during the scanning process , here's an example.


While the image processing steps undertaken as part of this effort may have removed some of these blemish features, users should be aware that blemish features exist in many of the images
apollo.sese.asu.edu...

Here's another.
www.abovetopsecret.com...




I can't stand the 'It's lint on the scanner' theory.

Are we not shooting digital frames through a 'clean' telescope? Because if not - we're WAY behind on technology, and should invest in some micro-fibers.

I never buy the 'lint on the camera' theory either. Coincidence - that Thousands of moon shots that show 'something' up there, are all tainted with freaking cat hair? Not a chance.

No self-respecting astronomer takes 10,000 pictures of anything with lint on his lens. Don't buy it.


What!! You mean they're NOT taken/shot from a spacecraft camera and sent back to earth as a data fie? Eliminating the "canning" step, and he nasty business of having to keep a lens clean?

How primitive; even by Terrestrial standards!!!

ETA:
Never mind; Google has no usable images of the Moon! That is ALL very old data, and artist's conception...altogether worthless except for curiosity.

Shame too!




edit on 7-10-2014 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 06:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

It is simply a mutated Brontosaurus trying out his new wig on the moon ladies.



posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: DigitalJedi805
Getting into animation I can tell you it is very common to get dust/dirt into panels and have it be noticeable for one or more frames. If you watch any old cartoon (pre-digital) you will seeso many goofs!


a reply to: gortex
I disagree, I think thats far more likely a giant flying space tick bloodsucker. Proof that the moon doesnt shower!



posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

LROC image of the area.

If it was there, it would take up a good portion of this cropped image:




posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:15 PM
link   
What reason would a secretive government or military have for going to the moon? It would need to be quite compelling to justify the extreme cost and the difficulties of keeping it quiet.

That's the real problem with space. What reason do we have for going there that we can't satisfy with unmanned probes and relatively low amounts of financial backing? Even outside of the military or secret government cabal there's not a heck of a lot of reason outside of scientific interest. NOW we're learning by the day, and interest in asteroid mining and "space tourism" is on the up. But until a very strong industrial or colonization reason for entering into space is apparent, it's still very light on justification.

This is why we spend hundreds of billions per year on healthcare and at least as much on military, but NASA only gets maybe 20 billion.
edit on 7-10-2014 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 06:41 AM
link   
we're going to war have to showcase im so sorry



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 08:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: DigitalJedi805
I can't stand the 'It's lint on the scanner' theory.

Are we not shooting digital frames through a 'clean' telescope? Because if not - we're WAY behind on technology, and should invest in some micro-fibers.



You need to understand; these are ALL very old images...dating back to the late 60's / early 70's.

Course, even then; folk new that you had to clean photographic equipment...

However; anything found on "Google Moon" is 40+ yearsold...at least!



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 08:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: jonnywhite

That's the real problem with space. What reason do we have for going there that we can't satisfy with unmanned probes and relatively low amounts of financial backing?


The survival of the Terrestrial Human species.

The best reason One can have, and, into space is the only place you will find it.



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 09:48 AM
link   
My guess is Neil Armstrong's pubic hair. Case closed.



posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   
For those interested Google Earth (Moon) coords are: 25°58'24.69"N 3°31'1.94"E

edit: for the record there are a bunch of these hairs/fuzz all over these pictures, and even several within close proximity to the titular anomaly. Pretty open/shut case to me.
edit on 41pm14fpmWed, 08 Oct 2014 15:12:17 -0500America/ChicagoWed, 08 Oct 2014 15:12:17 -0500 by Wayfarer because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
20
<< 1   >>

log in

join