Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

New Evidences of Extraterrestrial Lunar Bases

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 12 2005 @ 01:39 PM
link   
I’ve read about this a long time ago.

Check this site out:

www.marsanomalyresearch.com...




posted on May, 12 2005 @ 02:13 PM
link   
perhaps the towers are runways, it would make more since this is more likely a human made base than an extra terrestrial base if you ask me.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 02:27 PM
link   
One thing that strikes me as strange, and the main reason I'm somewhat skeptical of this, is the poor quality of the censorship. I would think that if there was something on there that just had to be hidden, whomever censored it would have gone to the length to hire a highly trained graphic tech to do the job, someone who does it for a living and who wouldn't make it that blurred. I mean, even someone who doesn't know much at all about Photoshop could've at least blurred out all of that one 'structure.' Aside from that, why release the images at all if there's something that you want to hide? No one in the public really gets to know exactly how many images NASA has, no one gets a direct line to Hubble or anything. There could've been a "signal loss," and the images with the good info didn't make it back to Earth. Not that difficult to keep images from a probe or non-public telescope out of the public eye.

Then again, just to contradict myself, it could be just someone telling a bad lie because they want to get caught for whatever reason. I'm still keeping my money on the skeptical side though.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 02:49 PM
link   
I agree with Mcory1; if there's some really significant stuff there, why give people the opportunity to view it in the first place? The picture with the 'horizontal building' looks unconvincing too. Seems to me that the alleged 'building' has been built on the corner of a crater (look at bottom left corner of the 'structure'). Why would anyone do that when there is flatter land available that surrounds the area? Anyway might be misinterpreting the image a bit, you certainly cant call me an expert with these things thats for sure
.

My verdict: People are makin a mountain out of a molehill.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by MCory1
One thing that strikes me as strange, and the main reason I'm somewhat skeptical of this, is the poor quality of the censorship. I would think that if there was something on there that just had to be hidden, whomever censored it would have gone to the length to hire a highly trained graphic tech to do the job, someone who does it for a living and who wouldn't make it that blurred. I mean, even someone who doesn't know much at all about Photoshop could've at least blurred out all of that one 'structure.'


Guys, this is more subtle than that. People behind this cover-up are probably very intelligent. They try to see how we think and react, and they set things perfectly in order to create confusion and skepticism. This is the way i see it.


Aside from that, why release the images at all if there's something that you want to hide? No one in the public really gets to know exactly how many images NASA has, no one gets a direct line to Hubble or anything. There could've been a "signal loss," and the images with the good info didn't make it back to Earth. Not that difficult to keep images from a probe or non-public telescope out of the public eye.


Clementine satellite has spent two months taking "officially"almost 2 milion images of the moon. I don't see them checking 2 milions of pictures, in detail. That's why there will be probably more discoveries.

[edit on 12/5/2005 by Musclor]



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 03:12 PM
link   
So WHERE is this location on the moon?
looks to be lit, so it must be on the side we CAN see. I would think such smokestackes would be visable to more than a couple of our powerfull telescopes....

If this is supposed to be the DARK side of the moon why is it so well lit?

If this was taken from the side of the moon we CAN see, then are we to think that whatever race made this stuff has cloaking capabilities they use all the time and the pics we are seeing is all we CAN see? We see the blurry whirry effects of such cloaking devices?


I would tend to think photos would VERY well be doctored to hide such buildings,(in the nature of hiding everything from us and all) those are some serious smokestacks! But then I wonder...WHY has NOBODY picked up on this if its on the visable side of the moon I mean COME ON!.......................so maybe it really IS visable to us in just the very way the photos are showing

Maybe its cloaking devise residual we are seeing?



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeltaChaos
So WHERE is this location on the moon?
looks to be lit, so it must be on the side we CAN see. I would think such smokestackes would be visable to more than a couple of our powerfull telescopes....

If this is supposed to be the DARK side of the moon why is it so well lit?

If this was taken from the side of the moon we CAN see, then are we to think that whatever race made this stuff has cloaking capabilities they use all the time and the pics we are seeing is all we CAN see? We see the blurry whirry effects of such cloaking devices?


I would tend to think photos would VERY well be doctored to hide such buildings,(in the nature of hiding everything from us and all) those are some serious smokestacks! But then I wonder...WHY has NOBODY picked up on this if its on the visable side of the moon I mean COME ON!.......................so maybe it really IS visable to us in just the very way the photos are showing

Maybe its cloaking devise residual we are seeing?




Dag snabitt all! that is MY post! we are hooking up DC's computor as I type this.......I can't wait to be able to once again bypass ALL the dang log-ons..........

I just keep 'spoon feedin' him all my 'kewl points' sheesh I am such a blonde.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 03:47 PM
link   
The picture of the close up actually looks like a building to me. If you look at the bottom right hand corner you will notice this bit has missed the censourship and it looks like its built similer to a chinese temple with all the triangular corners building up level upon level. There are definatly many floors to this building and it has definartly been rubberd out, we are not meant to see it.

It could however just be a hoax, i really don't no but saying that i have seen pictures of a cigar type craft hanging around the moon and Mars so there is something going on that arouses my suspicion.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 04:01 PM
link   
Here's the FAQ page regarding these pics

www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...

Read the BOLD paragraph. The mosaics were preliminary produced some time ago.
On a side note. I'd expect the Mars Mosaics to be cleaner due to better equipment and where the pics were shot from. land/space.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jaychael
Here's the FAQ page regarding these pics

www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...

Read the BOLD paragraph. The mosaics were preliminary produced some time ago.
On a side note. I'd expect the Mars Mosaics to be cleaner due to better equipment and where the pics were shot from. land/space.



I know this FAQ. Nothing new, classical explanations, all is normal, etc etc... Seriously, who buy that ?
If they show me a real explanation of the things we are seeing, then i may review my position. But there is obviously none...



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 04:13 PM
link   


If this is supposed to be the DARK side of the moon why is it so well lit?


Dark side of the moon? A Pink Floyd fan are we?

If you want to consider that the moon has "sides" then there is the
side facing the earth and the side facing away from the earth.
These are often called the near side and the far side.
(its a mystery why the Earth and Moon are so precisely in sync)

Both of these sides get fully lit eventually. Haven't you noticed the phases
of the moon. Don't you think that somewhere on the moon a full circle
is always lit? During a "new moon" the near side is not lit at all, that must
mean that the far side is fully lit.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Musclor

Originally posted by Jaychael
Here's the FAQ page regarding these pics

www.cmf.nrl.navy.mil...

Read the BOLD paragraph. The mosaics were preliminary produced some time ago.
On a side note. I'd expect the Mars Mosaics to be cleaner due to better equipment and where the pics were shot from. land/space.



I know this FAQ. Nothing new, classical explanations, all is normal, etc etc... Seriously, who buy that ?
If they show me a real explanation of the things we are seeing, then i may review my position. But there is obviously none...


It's a very real explaination.
Considering it's decade old sattelite mapping; I'm surprised there aren't more anomalies than we're seeing. I'm not trying to change anybodies position here, only provided a link to let people read for themselves.
Seriously.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 04:25 PM
link   
If these are in fact artificial structures, shouldn't they have lots of noticeable markings in the area around them, from where the builders walked, construction machinery was placed, or supply craft landed?

-koji K.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Guys, this is more subtle than that. People behind this cover-up are probably very intelligent. They try to see how we think and react, and they set things perfectly in order to create confusion and skepticism. This is the way i see it.


That's a very plausible scenario, but at the same time, where does it stop? "If he knows I know that he knows that I think he thinks that I think that he knows......." You got to draw the line somewhere.



Clementine satellite has spent two months taking "officially"almost 2 milion images of the moon. I don't see them checking 2 milions of pictures, in detail. That's why there will be probably more discoveries.


If they aren't checking all of them, then how did they find these that are blurred? Where are the original, uncensored versions? Besides, if they are hiding a lunar base (or bases) then I'm sure they'd know what regions to scan in particular and could make sure they got to those at least, if not the rest of the images. And aside from that, it wouldn't take a decent handful of people to scan through 2M pictures. Unless my math's wrong--and it may well be--10 people, taking about 10 seconds per picture for a good glance to see if there's any artifacts would take a little over three weeks to go through 2M pictures. I'm sure they have the budget to afford a couple more pairs of eyes for the job.

Regarding the FAQ link, I don't know if I buy it 100% or not, but it's reasonable enough. It doesn't explain the random blurs from what I read, but I'm not going to argue it too much without something better to stand on. I'm still wondering if there's anything anybody involved with these "cover-ups" could say other than "Yep we're lying" that could be taken as the truth, regardless of whether it is or not. It seems a lot of people have their heart set on one explanation, and if they hear anything to the contrary it's a bald-faced lie. Just my two cents...



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 04:36 PM
link   
Gazrok's right about the buildings. the 2 tall spires anyway (if that's what they are) being REALLY big.
I remember reading that they would have to be around 5 miles tall.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 04:39 PM
link   
Thats an excellent question, and from what i have heard there is a strange tower like object on the moon several kilometers high, but its on the darkside and only the apollo missions have the pictures, i do find it strange they do these 'mosaics' whats is the purpose of that? also some remarks neil armstrong made are interesting, "they are up there and their not making cheese" I think there is astory that years later a professor asked armstrong what happened up there and he gave a story of moon bases,and ufos.



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 05:00 PM
link   
I agree with some of above, I work in Photoshop for a living and the 'covering up' is
garbage! There will be a normal reason because if there was something there that could be earth shattering, they would have shown the images in the first place!



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Whoops!
I mean they WOULDN'T have shown the images in the first place!



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 05:13 PM
link   
We actually have a very strong testimony from a former US Air Force military, Karl Wolfe, from Disclosure Project, who saw classified pictures of lunar structures. You can see his video testimony at the Press Conference.


It seems a lot of people have their heart set on one explanation, and if they hear anything to the contrary it's a bald-faced lie. Just my two cents...


This is truly false, at least for me. I changed my mind on several ufo cases, and i would do it again if a valid explanation is given to me. But at this moment there is none.

[edit on 12/5/2005 by Musclor]



posted on May, 12 2005 @ 05:19 PM
link   
I thought the 'other side of the moon was completely dark how can we get pictures if its in darkness all the time ??????

We have telescopes that go miles if something was really up there i think someone might have found it by now.......

But then there are thoses who claim they already have !!!

We need something soon though don't thing planet Earth can handle much more Human abuse let alone the abuse we inflict on each other.





new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join