Moon Surface Anomalies [Many Pics]

Trickz, frankly I havent researched Mars surface anomalies for a few reasons. First, there are just so many moon anomalies. Two, I would assume NASA at this point is more skilled in removing anomalies post proccesing. Most of the moon ones are from pre 80's all the way back to the 50's.

Which isnt to say I don't know of alot of Mars anomalies. As to the perplexing face. Frankly, it could be a rock. I live here in Phoenix and our mesa's and rock formations look amazingly like things. The part I find unusall is how nicely timed the rock slide was when we reimaged.

All the other rock and so called pyramids around the area fine except for the face. Who knows... I think the moon would be a better indicator of life its so close and they say If you want to hide something put it in sight.

As to NASA withholding things. Why for any reason would NASA have a) the right to hold back images of celestial objects b) hold back images of celestial objects? As to it being a time constraint of assembeling topographial information b.s. They are NASA, they have more advanced topography analyzers and software than the US Army. But! Yes there could be slight problems with the images that give the illusion of something there anything is possible, but ALL of these anomalies are the result of error? The same anomalie in different images captured at a different time? The Shard is a photo anomalie? The Castle? Where there is smoke.

www.anomalous-images.com...

Ya, my rhetoric was a little difficult to decipher. Let me say it another way:

I was curious if it is unique or against the odds that we do not observe the entire surface of our moon from Earth, and if we were to be observing the moons of other planets from the surface of the planets they revolve around, would we infact be able to see the entire surface of their respective moons as observed from the surface of their planets?


edited to add:

Sometimes when faced with enigmatic and unsubstantiated unequivical proof, we need not give up, but attempt to look for the answers to our questions by asking different questions. I think sometimes we fail to simply ask the right questions. And when we resolve such speculative inquiries, we need to couple those findings with parrallel conflicting known enomilies with our findings to devise a progressive hypothesis, or theory.

[edit on 7-1-2006 by Esoteric Teacher]

I've read dozens of books concerning the same issues discussed here in this Forum on our beloved ATS. I think this book described below is a good read for multiple reasons, although i don't personally find all of it to be accurate, there is a relitively mild degree of speculative intuition presented by the author, but backed up with plausible evidence to support it as worthy of consideration.

I think anyone who is interested in anomilies on the surface of other planetary objects, and a serious analysis of the protocols of NASA and how pictures are released to the public may very well be interested in this book. It has little to do with the moon, however the incosistancies with NASA'a handling and releasing of information is intriguing and informative from any avid conspiritor's perspective. Just thought i would suggest this book for anyone curious about possible and deliberate discrepancies between freedom of information and protocols concerning voyager program picture releases throughout the 70s and early 80s.




link / source:
search.netcenter.netscape.com...
+of+mars+city+on+the+edge+of+forever&page=1&offset=0&result_url=redir%
3Fsrc%3Dwebsearch%26requestId%3D85c8c20530a5cfbd%26clickedItemRank
%3D5%26userQuery%3Dmonuments%2Bof%2Bmars%2Bcity%2Bon%2Bthe%2
Bedge%2Bof%2Bforever%26clickedItemURN%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.
enterprisemission.com%252Fstores.html%26invocationType%3D-%26fromPage
%3DNS8BrowserRoll%26amp%3BampTest%3D1&remove_url=http%3A%2F%2F
www.enterprisemission.com%2Fstores.html

The following is a brief, but understatement (my opinion) about the book:

arcology row 4822
Thanx Starfleetcommander, you got my vote.I have been looking for the photos Hoagland was talking about for years.Especially interesting is the object rolling uphill.It leaves consistently identical tracks along the whole trail.My guess is a lunar explorer module though from what country or species i cant guess.Fascinating.
Also am i the only one who thinks the meandering gully directly underneath "arcology row" in lunar photo 4822 looks an awful lot like a riverbed?Look at it.....how else but by liquid erosion could it be formed?What the heck is that?

www.ufos-aliens.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk...

Heres a neat thing on how Nasa did it in during the Apollo missions to the moon.

Heres something interesting to about NASA I think you should know.

If NASA was formed as a 'civilian space agency', why were so many NASA programs funded by the US Defence Department?

Why were all astronauts subjected to US military security regulations?

Why were all video and photographic evidence screened by the National Security Agency?

Why were all the radio communications screened by the National Security Agency?

After spending millions of taxpayers' dollars planning a 'Moon City', why has the Moon not been visited by NASA since 1973?

Why are some of NASA's top photographic technicians employed to 'airbrush out' anomalies caught on film?

Why are astronauts and other NASA employees threatened with long jail sentences if they 'speak out' about what was really discovered out there in space?

Do you realise that no information, either photographic or otherwise, reaches the public domain until it has been thoroughly scrutinised and sanitized by the US intelligence community, and has been in effect since the space program began?.

www.ufos-aliens.co.uk...

I recieved a U2U from one of our attentive MODS. It seems when I edited my link in a previous post in order for it not to make the page so wide, i kiiled the link. Sorry Guys.

Just Google or use search on internet to look up "Monuments of Mars, City on the edge of forever" , and you'll be able to find out about the book I was refering to.

Your right it is, sorry. The link was soooooo long that i dissected it so it took up more lines, instead of having it straight across on 1 line. The link should work if you copy the red and the black print lines under and transfer it to the search block. Other than that, i don't know how to readily fix it. Sorry about this. At any rate if you google "Monuments of Mars, City on the edge of Forever" you will find better info than what i presented in my post. I'll know better in the future, and sorry for the confusion.

It's imho a given that these artifacts are real, i mean we have some of these on earth, (giza plateau, ultra large structures near ural, won't go into detail, don't need to).

what is so utterly frightening about it all except that the moon (and probably earth, too) was shot up by disruptor fire? why still hide it after ages? i doubt our self-centered civilisation is of interest to anyone, besides with a bit of luck the civilisation that did it might have died out or killed itself by now.

What is it that's apparenly known to those, who some of us call 'the elites', and so utterly and prohibitively dangerous to tell? this is NOT a trivial question, we (offcially) had 42 years of cold war, including the permanent threat of worldwide nuclear annihilation! does it get any better than that? if yes, i would urge you to explore the options.

PS: there's only ONE world conspiracy, this fits neatly in, just like JFK's death (wasn't he the guy who couldn't quit talking about the moon...), anything you wish, it's part of a large picture. look at it, preconceived notions are only distorted reflections of the world.

Unbelievalbe, Moon Base images now available on Military website, check this out:

First image shows a huge rectangular structure looking straight down on it.

Second one shows two tall tower structures that have been censored. Based on the size and shape these structures are over a mile high!

The third image shows another massive structure that has been censored also.

Another Moon anomaly

[edit on 9-8-2006 by Amon_Ra]

Aren't there some better photos around than those crappy, ridiculously blown-up things Hoagland tries to pass off as "proof?" I just don't see it. Some people have way too much imagination and poor eyesight.

Here's the Apollo 10 image 4822. What the hell is Hoagland going on about with his "Castle" and "Missing Horizon?"



[edit on 9-8-2006 by Enkidu]

P.S. -- And here's an even better one on Keith Laney's excellent site. Much better than the one in the NASA archive.

www.keithlaney.net...

[edit on 9-8-2006 by Enkidu]

I just want to clear up the question of whether the moon spins on its axis or not, and whether other moons have similar dynamics. The lunar day (time it takes to spin on its axis) is the same as the lunar year (the amount of time it takes to complete an orbit of the Earth). This is why we always see the same side of the moon from Earth. I don't know for sure, but I am fairly (99%) sure that this is very rare among other moons. In other words, as viewed from their parent planet, you would be able to see more than just the one side of that planets moons as they revolve and orbit around that planet.

Some of the posted pictures are interesting, but most of them could simply be natural formations. The human eye is very good at finding recognizable patterns. Make sure you're not letting what you want to be in the picture determine what you see in the picture. It would be nice if there were structures on the moon, as it would be proof of either aliens that can travel the stars or that humans have advanced technology of which we are unaware, but I see little solid proof in the pictures above.

From the last website:



Good point.

blurred photoshop editing is not a natural formation, for all we know there could be nothing on the moon, hypothetically speaking, yet a few secret mongers decided to edit all available moon footage (the miniscule part which hasn't been magically lost) for reasons we can only imagine.


either way, the cost of such an operation is prohibitively high, in terms of both, cash and credibility, so it's only fair to doubt official explanations and consider the existance of ancient artificial structures on the lunar surface.

[edit on 10-8-2006 by Long Lance]

I thought i would pull up an older thread that has (for me), an unresolved aspect to it. It is also a great thread, i think.

Do other planets' moons show their whole surface to their host planets?

If you didn't notice, these are Navy photos. Maybe you can find better photos, but those ones are trementously important. I would like to find the originals.

Is the same like you would find UFO's on Government webpages. They are all brushed out before sent to the public domain.

[edit on 20-8-2006 by Amon_Ra]

Ok, How idiotic is it of the military website to censor out parts of the lunar surface and NOT expect us to think somethings up? Do they think we really are that dumb? But if were not, then why not boicott (or something) to FORCE them to tell us whats really going on?

I´m so tired of all this censorship its not even funny. Obviously somethings there. Why in the world would they censor it if not? It´s .....ing ridiculous!

Sorry to vent my anger out guys. I had to sign up and be heard. Enough is enough!

But as we all can see, something is going on on the lunar surface. These things aren´t "natural" creations. Perfect squares and a thing rolling UP a hill leaving tracks?!

Great posts, made me think alot and really get upset at the gubment(al)!

Take care!

SS2682

In one of the pictures it says "Strangley obscure"
The image is clearly in the dark. Of course it's obscure.
Well, I've got to hand it to you, you've sure found some crappy pictures to bring about some sort of seedy idea.
Best to run for the hills. The Government will be after you now.
Maybe it's for the best.

yes you are exactly right. humans only went on the moon one time i believe, and then they stopped. atleast we know why!

What...?
You don't KNOW that. By NO means do you know that, and by no means is that a fact.

None of these pictures are the least bit convincing. Stop looking for something that isn't there! Why would NASA go to great lengths to censor moon photos, yet at the same time clumsily forget to censor giant moon structures and other anomalies?